Tested again with KM-Goanna-20180101 after deleting those folders.

screenshot

Amazing! Your system is outside the laws of space and time!
...
I certainly would be interesting to delve into how to work a filter graph in your system
(using graphstudionext), but it's probably unnecessary.

In any case, the precedent entertaining.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/02/2018 06:23PM by hermes.

And since I'm at testing
These are the results with Firefox ESR 52.5.3.

screenshot

FF has no such features. The standard version of FF is not able to use LAV filters.
And therefore does not suffer without their presence.

In Your case, system does not fit the usual model of a functioning (for KM-Goanna).
FF works using standard system codec (on 7+, and loaded codec into XP / Vista by Cisco).

But it is clear that FF uses much more memory than KM. Nevertheless, with the LAV filters, KM uses two times less memory (as seen from my video and Your screenshot). As for comparison with FF, KM with LAV uses 3.5 times less resources (as can be seen from Your screenshot / my video)!

In other words, the use of LAV justified in any configuration (it should be strongly recommended!).



Edited 8 time(s). Last edit at 01/02/2018 07:34PM by hermes.

Quote
hermes
FF has no such features. The standard version of FF is not able to use LAV filters.

I knew that. The reason for the screenshot was another.
The memory leak caused by some embedded videos you and others experience, doesn't affect FF too?
Or is it only my computer where it doesn't show up?

Quote
hermes
In other words, the use of LAV justified in any configuration (it should be strongly recommended!).

Agreed.

Quote
Yogi
The memory leak caused by some embedded videos you and others experience, doesn't affect FF too?
Or is it only my computer where it doesn't show up?

FF does not have this feature (or defect).



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/02/2018 08:33PM by hermes.

Quote
hermes
FF does not have this feature (or defect).

I got it - or I think so at least.
Correct me please if I'm wrong:
Those memory leaks (in case of embedded vids) can only occur with browsers (e.g. KM-Goanna) using code that makes possible to view MP4-files on systems that don't have native support for H.264. Other browsers (e.g. KM-Gecko or FF) are not affected.
To avoid such memory leaks and to optimize ressource consumption, the use of LAVFilters is highly recommended regardless of the OS the browser is running on.
---
Even so I'm the only one so far who didn't wittnes those memory leaks, I can confirm that KM-Goanna with LAVFilters has the lowest ressource consumtion on my OS (Win7), compared to KM-Goanna without LAVFilters, KM-Gecko or FirefoxESR.

Everything is absolutely accurate

Sounds like those magic LAV-files should most definitely be included
Unzipped just 3-4% of whole KM-folder-size, that's worth it.

@siria
Better to see once: http://kmeleonbrowser.org/forum/read.php?19,144552,144624#msg-144624
please, view proposed videos, demonstration is more than obvious.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/03/2018 03:30PM by hermes.

Quote
siria
Sounds like those magic LAV-files should most definitely be included
Unzipped just 3-4% of whole KM-folder-size, that's worth it.

It's not about file size but the adequate selection.
That's probably the reason roytam1 didn't include them by default.
IMHO, leveling them to the least common denominator wouldn't be the most appropriate approach.

IMO if some users really want those 7% more speed, they can always upgrade. Until then, they have no major probs, everything works.

But on the other hand, if the big majority of users have massive freeze probs, this is an absolute killer-bug.

3-4% of file size, 6-7% of CPU load... that is not important. It is important that ignoring them in General case (except lucky Yogi) leads to a strong instability of application. And in fact, potentially dangerous. The fact that they are not included in current package, says about early stage of development (and that's normal).

roytam1 and so performed a miracle, but he can't (and shouldn't) be everywhere.
The presence of many architectural solutions, speaks about multifaceted nature of topic. Filters and so part of kit. But as developer, directed to perfection, roytam1 showed a very democratic approach (hoping for consciousness of a end user). And giving opportunity to consciously make a choice. It's a chance to 6-7 percent of CPU where they weight as gold (on weak but not old netbooks, as example).

Of course, if user is only able to extract archive and... all. He will never be able to make a right decision. In this case, needs complete flexibility and compatibility. Those who have a head, will be able to make a choice.

I think what you agree .

@siria

And how can even an advanced user know that the brand-new official package can be "upgraded"? By spending hours reading the forums?
And even so, after each browser update those filters have to be "upgraded" too because they will be replaced by the default ones.
On the other hand, a download link with a hint, that points to the LAVFilters (as roytam1 did) allows everybody to choose the appropriate filters.
For those who still don't know which filter to download, the hint can contain something like: "If you are not sure which filter to choose, download this".
The differences between the filters are not crucial. However roytam1 didn't offer them because he had too much time on his hands but to offer the best user experience.

Whatever, it's only my oppinion.

The possibility of choices for advanced users is very important. But less experienced ones do not have a choice, as long as they don't waste endless time studying and learning.
What's so great about those LAV codecs is that they work for both: they are not hardcoded and unreplacable, only make life easier for 99% (?) of the users. And the advanced ones can simply exchange them themselves - perfect KM-philosophy for me

Yogi

Quote

The differences between the filters are not crucial.

Have a critical difference. Compatibility.

But it is critical only for configurations is more weaker (than of Yogi).
As I understand it, you are satisfied with the status of quo.

Like as you said, none of "users" will read not only this forum, but in General anything.
And browser (from someone, from one of friends, as example) in archive. And when this browser hang or overload their computer, will be only one to blame, a browser. Most will not understand (and nobody will understand). The idea should be, in your opinion, to leave the extremely dangerous potential vulnerability open? Only therefore what it for You did not happen?

Quote
Yogi
a download link with a hint, that points to the LAVFilters (as roytam1 did) allows everybody to choose the appropriate filters

No prob to have both: already included basic filters for 99%, and a download link with a hint for those who are interested enough to check it and upgrade.

The paradox is that more powerful your processor, it less fundamental is replacement of LAV filters. Accordingly, dear Yogi's PC is so powerful, that I just don't understand what he doesn't like. In fact, he (as owner of a quad-core processor) do not have to worry about it.

There is still a good rule: if works on weakest configuration, this can work anywhere.
But on contrary this not working.



Edited 8 time(s). Last edit at 01/03/2018 11:07PM by hermes.

Quote
hermes
As I understand it, you are satisfied with the status of quo.

I don't exactly undersand what "status quo" refers to.
If you mean the way LAVFilters are offered (as a separate download) - yes.

Quote
hermes
Like as you said, none of "users" will read not only this forum, but in General anything.
And browser (from someone, from one of friends, as example) in archive. And when this browser hang or overload their computer, will be only one to blame, a browser. Most will not understand (and nobody will understand). The idea should be, in your opinion, to leave the extremely dangerous potential vulnerability open? Only therefore what it for You did not happen?

I can hardly imagine that someone will be offered by a friend software that doesn't work in an archive.

After thinking more about it, there is indeed the risk that a user gets a package without LAVFilters and without even knowing about them - namely if he downloads from a third party hoster like FileHippo, CNet, SoftPedia, ...

Therefore including the filter in the official package would indeed make sense.

What I'd consider important nonetheless - to make a good visible hint (with the respective download link) for all filters on our Download page. So at least people downloading from our page get offered the choice between filters.
Those who take the time for reading the hint can decide to leave the package as it is or to replace the contained filter with the one optimized for their hardware.

Quote
Yogi

Quote
hermes
Accordingly, dear Yogi's PC is so powerful, that I just don't understand what he doesn't like. In fact, he (as owner of a quad-core processor) do not have to worry about it.

Sorry Hermes, I'm afraid that you misunderstood something.
This is not about Yogi, it's not about Siria and it's not about Hermes!

It's about oppinions to make the best choice for people who are not regulars of these forums.

Hermes knows which filter to choose, Siria meanwhile knows as well and Yogi with his extragalactic five years old computer can find out by testing.

It was not about me. I could not understand your desire to stubbornly keep the original set is empty (without any filters at all) that is strategically wrong. And a possible drop or overload would make for browser bad publicity.

Yogi

Quote

I don't exactly undersand what "status quo" refers to.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Status_quo

Quote

I can hardly imagine that someone will be offered by a friend software that doesn't work in an archive.

It happens all the time . Periodically I witness such phenomena. Many people often forget.

Quote

After thinking more about it, there is indeed the risk that a user gets a package without LAVFilters and without even knowing about them - namely if he downloads from a third party hoster like FileHippo, CNet, SoftPedia, ...

Therefore including the filter in the official package would indeed make sense.

What I'd consider important nonetheless - to make a good visible hint (with the respective download link) for all filters on our Download page. So at least people downloading from our page get offered the choice between filters.
Those who take the time for reading the hint can decide to leave the package as it is or to replace the contained filter with the one optimized for their hardware.

Well, actually exactly this was discussed in this thread. And that's exactly what I thought .
...
It's only better to replace the description on main page with one that came up with siria.
http://kmeleonbrowser.org/forum/read.php?19,144552,144588#msg-144588
(It is important to specify processor instructions for those who need them)

And I think it's important to mention:
http://kmeleonbrowser.org/forum/read.php?19,144552,144604#msg-144604



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 01/03/2018 11:45PM by hermes.

Quote
hermes

Yogi

Quote

I don't exactly undersand what "status quo" refers to.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Status_quo

I know what "status quo" means.

Quote
hermes
As I understand it, you are satisfied with the status of quo.

I wasn't sure what you refer to when using those words.

I know that my English is not enough (and that's an understatement).

(at end of topic)

For example, you add by default filters with SSE2 (as fastest solution), and browser will crash if CPU does not support SSE2 and if user tries to watch a video. With compatible filters it will work on worst and best configuration without sudden crashes. Logical?



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 01/04/2018 12:02AM by hermes.

BTW ,

Quote
hermes

It was not about me. I could not understand your desire to stubbornly keep the original set is empty (without any filters at all) that is strategically wrong.

Did you even read my post?

Quote

Therefore including the filter in the official package would indeed make sense.

Well, I did quote him . The topic is closed.

Guys... peace
I see here misunderstandings all the time, nothing worth arguing.
What matters:
We've come to a full agreement 3:0!

PS: since this thread is also meant for future reference, the last 5 postings are complete nonsense (incl. mine here). Shall I delete them?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/04/2018 12:10AM by siria.

Well, there was just a discussion. I did not notice violations. Of course, redundant messages can be removed. Speaking about the end of topic, was referring to senselessness of further discussion in connection with obviousness of action.

It's okay.

I will choose SSE2-free package of LAV for the Pro build.

This is just my decision as being author of the build. Anyone can create it's own build anyway including (or not) other components.

That's easy. Users will choose.

But it seems (from my POV) important for browser and its reputation and user loyalty to avoid a risk of unnecessary crashes and other bad UX.

Official build is downloaded times more frequently than any custom build - that's why the impression is created here, in mainstream package.

And I'm happy that a lot of improvements from Pro do migrate to official - not because of being 'mine' (most of them really aren't, sure) but due to the fact they really make the official build better.

And I plan ask roytam1 for some possible changes in old modules keeping the same idea in mind: make KM better and more user-friendly.

Quote
siria
IMO if some users really want those 7% more speed, they can always upgrade. Until then, they have no major probs, everything works.

But on the other hand, if the big majority of users have massive freeze probs, this is an absolute killer-bug.

For playing L5.1 with ref-frames > 3, it is not only 7% improvement with assembly/SSE2 enabled.

Quote
rodocop
And I plan ask roytam1 for some possible changes in old modules keeping the same idea in mind: make KM better and more user-friendly.

<offtop>

I'm sure, You think about bookmark editor, right? : )
Or abstraction for hot keys with respect to input language (like is often mentioned).

</offtop>

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/04/2018 07:05AM by hermes.