At 08:14 -0700 18/4/02, you (Jonathan Morton) wrote:

>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.  :)

In a reply to Adrian Umpleby on this list, I mentioned the way I use 
x2vnc and similar clients, which is quite far removed from your 
scenario above.  I suspect there may not be many users like me. 
However, I have a proposal.  My problems would be solved if ChromiVNC 
would honour a zero-area FramebufferUpdateRequest (by sending no 
updates until the next such request).  You would only be concerned 
with "reducing the update area" for the special case of reducing it 
to a rectangle of zero area, which should be easier to handle than 
the general case.

Thanks,

d.

-- 
seeking employment                               phone +61 2 9705 9096
PGP key available  NO JUNK MAIL            mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
D A Vincent   speaking for self only  http://www.zeta.org.au/~dvincent
          "What am I expected to do?  Shout 'man overboard'?"
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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
---------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply via email to