Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 24

Thread: Chrome 27 Beta: ~5% Faster, New HTML5 Inputs

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    15,683

    Default Chrome 27 Beta: ~5% Faster, New HTML5 Inputs

    Phoronix: Chrome 27 Beta: ~5% Faster, New HTML5 Inputs

    There's some more interesting web-browser related news. Google has pushed out the beta of their Chrome 27 browser and it comes with several new user-facing features...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTM0MzY

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    151

    Default

    Still no OSS audio support though, grr. I switched to Opera now, at least until it will be implemented (if ever).

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Pennsylvania, United States
    Posts
    1,941

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nuc!eoN View Post
    Still no OSS audio support though, grr. I switched to Opera now, at least until it will be implemented (if ever).
    Considering OSSv4 was abandoned 6years ago I'm gonna guess you're a FreeBSD user?

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    28

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nuc!eoN View Post
    Still no OSS audio support though, grr.
    Yeah, but I heard 27 was supposed to bring native pulseaudio support. Has anyone tested it out yet?

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    202

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fa5hion View Post
    Yeah, but I heard 27 was supposed to bring native pulseaudio support. Has anyone tested it out yet?
    It doesn't already?
    Anyway, Google is developing its own audio server (CRAS) for Chrome OS

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    28

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by newwen View Post
    It doesn't already?
    Anyway, Google is developing its own audio server (CRAS) for Chrome OS
    Chrome wasn't using pulseaudio directly but through the compatibility layer (alsa) instead. And answering to myself, the new pulseaudio output seems to work fine. The application identifies itself as Chromium in the mixer though.

  7. #7

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ericg View Post
    Considering OSSv4 was abandoned 6years ago I'm gonna guess you're a FreeBSD user?
    OSSv4 does not appear to be abandoned. They did a release last year:

    http://www.opensound.com/forum/viewt...hp?f=19&t=4754

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Pennsylvania, United States
    Posts
    1,941

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ryao View Post
    OSSv4 does not appear to be abandoned. They did a release last year:

    http://www.opensound.com/forum/viewt...hp?f=19&t=4754
    Weird... Arch must need to update their packages

    https://www.archlinux.org/packages/c...ty/x86_64/oss/ (look at the name)

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    151

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ericg View Post
    Weird... Arch must need to update their packages

    https://www.archlinux.org/packages/c...ty/x86_64/oss/ (look at the name)
    2007 is not the year but the build number. I use ArchLinux not BSD.

    Chromium has no OSS support, it only works through ALSA emulation (didn't work for some releases but in 26 it's been fixed).
    https://code.google.com/p/chromium/i...tail?id=158478
    https://code.google.com/p/chromium/i...etail?id=19470

    OSS has the least latency and I don't see no reason to use ALSA or even Pulse (although pulse works also on top of OSS I think). With ALSA my latency was unacceptable.

    Here are very good articles comparing Linux sound systems:
    http://insanecoding.blogspot.de/2007...-in-linux.html
    http://insanecoding.blogspot.de/2009...-so-sorry.html

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Pennsylvania, United States
    Posts
    1,941

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nuc!eoN View Post
    2007 is not the year but the build number. I use ArchLinux not BSD.

    Chromium has no OSS support, it only works through ALSA emulation (didn't work for some releases but in 26 it's been fixed).
    https://code.google.com/p/chromium/i...tail?id=158478
    https://code.google.com/p/chromium/i...etail?id=19470

    OSS has the least latency and I don't see no reason to use ALSA or even Pulse (although pulse works also on top of OSS I think). With ALSA my latency was unacceptable.

    Here are very good articles comparing Linux sound systems:
    http://insanecoding.blogspot.de/2007...-in-linux.html
    http://insanecoding.blogspot.de/2009...-so-sorry.html
    if you're on a desktop I'm sure it works fine but on laptops... OSS still doesn't support suspend or jack detection.
    Last edited by Ericg; 04-04-2013 at 08:24 PM.

Posting Permissions

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