>I remember Jonathan mentioning to me that he thought it was better >for the client to have the whole display at its end, even if it was >not all needed, so it was ready for the case when it scrolled into >view (or something like that...)
I was having particular trouble with certain viewers, which caused all kinds of havoc when it proved necessary to scroll the window. Frequently, the result was a partially-updated view and extremely poor performance. Since I expected most users to use a standard Mac desktop with menus and icons scattered all over the screen, I figured scrolling performance weighed above the ability to "save bandwidth" on a small viewer screen. If many users are using a very small viewer screen, then I may look into a way of reducing the update area, while still reducing the scrolling artifacts somewhat. Please join the queue of requested features, outside the door. :) -- -------------------------------------------------------------- from: Jonathan "Chromatix" Morton mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (not for attachments) website: http://www.chromatix.uklinux.net/ geekcode: GCS$/E dpu(!) s:- a21 C+++ UL++ P L+++ E W+ N- o? K? w--- O-- M++$ V? PS PE- Y+ PGP++ t- 5- X- R !tv b++ DI+++ D G e+ h+ r++ y+(*) tagline: The key to knowledge is not to rely on people to teach you it. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the line: 'unsubscribe vnc-list' in the message BODY See also: http://www.uk.research.att.com/vnc/intouch.html ---------------------------------------------------------------------
