[quote=tonestone57]
I bought a new laptop with Intel HD (h264) around 8-10 months back (& recently a Geforce HD card for desktop) and I’d be unhappy using HTML5 with VP8 running through CPU only. On one hand, I’m glad Google is giving a free alternative but other I’m not happy because I’ll need newer hardware for GPU decoding HD video.[/quote]
Yes, there are always drawbacks. WebM hardware acceleration is being implemented in newer hardware but that won’t help you in this case. While it’s probably technically possible for the hardware acceleration to be rewritten to handle VP8 (afaik most hardware accelerated video relies on programmable DSP’s which can be reprogrammed by an update) that’s very unlikely to happen since hardware manufacturers want you to by a NEW piece of hardware with that functionality.
But given that HTML5 and WebM will make Flash less of a necessity and that it can be implemented across all platforms means that for me personally the pro’s outweigh the con’s.
I agree with you that having open standards for the Internet is best. Closed source standards for Internet are really bad. Look at Flash and how Adobe decides which OSes to support making other OSes without Flash depend on Gnash which is only so-so in comparison and supports fewer websites.
VP8 will still play on computers but with higher CPU use. Youtube only encodes 480p & 720p for VP8. So, at least with HMTL5 + WebM we would be able to watch (480p & for many also 720p) Youtube videos on Haiku when added to browser. Not happy that I’d miss out on hardware decoding until I upgraded my video hardware + laptop again. Well, Flash with H.264 is always an alternative on supported OSes so I get to make the choice myself.
I agree with you that having open standards for the Internet is best. Closed source standards for Internet are really bad. Look at Flash and how Adobe decides which OSes to support making other OSes without Flash depend on Gnash which is only so-so in comparison and supports fewer websites.
VP8 will still play on computers but with higher CPU use. Youtube only encodes 480p & 720p for VP8. So, at least with HMTL5 + WebM we would be able to watch (480p & for many also 720p) Youtube videos on Haiku when added to browser. Not happy that I’d miss out on hardware decoding until I upgraded my video hardware + laptop again. Well, Flash with H.264 is always an alternative on supported OSes so I get to make the choice myself.[/quote]
I have a P4 3.0ghz office computer that plays h264 just fine CPU useage is high but its not like I am frequently having to do other stuff while video is playing. Haiku handles that very gracefully however.
If this was a MS OS or Linux I’d be terrified of the consequences, Hiaku and BEOS handle this type of stuff just fine however.
At home my 1.2GHz Desktop with 333Mhz DDR tops out the CPU on any of the hiher resolution videos on YouTube, but playing the same videos at work on QuadCore machines does not even begin to stress a single CPU according to Pulse. And everything else runs fine at the same time. And this is using VESA for the graphics.
Hardware decoding does not seem that important on newer machines, at-least for anything I have played.
It appears that this question is really four sub-questions, and I’ll try to get to all four.
Firstly, I'd recommend to use Office Online (you will need to upgrade the browser) or find a suite that *might* compile and/or run. Out of all four, this one is the hardest to answer.
Secondly, use Clockwerk to edit video. You can insert the card from your camera--however, check in Devices to see that your card reader is recognized. (It is recommended to use a USB-based reader instead of a built-in one.) You can also find a removable device you can transfer the video to that Haiku will recognize (this should have answered your previous post.) :)
Thirdly, look at progress with Arora and with Firefox. You might just have HTML5 support in Haiku. HTML5 is debuting at YouTube--see http://www.youtube.com/html5.
Fourthly, the Be file system *does* get fragmented, but I do not put this on the same level as fat32 in comparison. To best match your filing requirements, look at the block size and inodes you set when preparing your partition(s). Not verifying what you will be storing, or prolonged, heavy disk use can fragment it, leading to the "disk full" error stated earlier in this thread.