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 ---------------------------------------------------------------------
