Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 345
Results 41 to 44 of 44

Thread: Ubuntu 11.04: i686 vs. i686 PAE vs. x86_64

  1. #41
    Join Date
    Jun 2010

    Default are you serious?

    I mean, do you really consider ditching flashplayer for gnash or lightspark to be a viable solution for a company like canonical (dare I say a viable solution at all)?

  2. #42
    Join Date
    Sep 2010


    Quote Originally Posted by allquixotic View Post
    I agree with the point of the article that 64-bit should be the default / "recommended" version. Canonical should ship the beta of Adobe Flash 10.3 "Square" 64-bit whenever a user requests a flash install (or if they check the third-party software box at install-time), thus pressuring Adobe to finalize 64-bit support and make Flash update releases of 64-bit in lock-step with 32-bit.
    They need permission from Adobe to redistribute that plugin, and last I heard about that Adobe doesn't want to give this permission...

  3. #43
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Have a good day.


    Quote Originally Posted by deanjo View Post
    Nope he isn't the only one. At least with Adobe reader I can fill in Adobe forms, it gets print orientation right and produces a better print job (the dithering is horrible on print outs on the free solutions).
    Not to talk about the superior rendering, the tab interface, 3D support (admitedly not used much) and the possibility to tweak everything to your taste. When it comes to PDFs, I'm yet to see anything that approaches the bar set by acroread. Having said this, I recently discovered an impressingly fast and keyboard-driven pdf viewer that I use for quick & dirt document checking: MuPDF. For that use case, I recommend it over Xpdf, Okular and company. For those who care about it, I suggest PDF-XChange for document annotation and form-filling. It's got a gratis version and (for once) it works perfect under Wine. Forget abot PS trickery, loading documents in Inkscape or nonsense like that.

  4. #44
    Join Date
    Feb 2010


    While I agree about the poor coloring scheme, at least the positions remained the same throughout all the benchmarks and they where in the same order as the labels so the color did not matter that much.

    I wonder though what made Apache2 bork on the 64-bit version, it's basically the only test where 64 is slower than 32.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts