On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 1:04 PM, John A. Sullivan III wrote: > Interesting observation. That is true; we did not create separate VM > definitions for SPICE and TSPlus thus the TSPlus environment is using > the QXL driver. Would we expect that to have any "supercharging" effect > on RDP? > >
Probably not, because afaik (that is not so much ;-) Remote Desktop (and probably tsplus too) works at the GDI call level, so it should not depend so much on video adapter/video driver... It was simply a question that arose analysing how to correctly replicate comparisons... Coming back to the test case and these operations: rdp 17: display desktop, i.e., minimize all open applications 42: Paint existing LibreOffice document, i.e., restore from minimize spice 61: display desktop, i.e., minimize all open applications 92: Paint existing LibreOffice document, i.e., restore from minimize I think they are GDI ones, so that naturally when using rdp they are executed locally on client desktop (only the gdi directives are sent), while in spice (raster?) they will be network intensive (from a slow link point of view). So probably an optimized rdp could never be beaten on too slow links? So my question is: could it be that instead of say spice vs tsplus in general, we ought to go in determining what is the minimum necessary bandwith to give the final user an acceptable experience (need to define "acceptable" ;-) ? Or, if I'm not wrong, as pcoip incorporates in some way both rdp and raster capabilities so that it is able to "automatically" determine what to use, the right way should be to do something similar for spice? Gianluca _______________________________________________ Spice-devel mailing list Spice-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel
