On Wed, 07 Sep 2011 11:52:09 -0500 DRC <dcomman...@users.sourceforge.net> wrote:
> > Hi, Pierre. You may have missed that part of my analysis, but levels > above 6 are equally as useless on older TigerVNC versions, as well as > TightVNC (and TurboVNC doesn't use anything above level 1.) > Your analysis mentioned that the compression levels also affected the sub-rectangle logic, and it wasn't entirely clear to me how important that knob was. > Additionally, this change is only to the GUI. You can still select > levels 7-9 from the command line. That's because I don't want to take > those levels away from the user, in case there is some extremely rare > corner case in which they might be beneficial. However, until/unless > someone comes forward with a strong case showing where 7-9 are > beneficial, I want to heavily discourage the use of those levels. My > extensive testing revealed that 4-6 are very rarely useful, and 7-9 > never are. I'm fine with removing support for fringe scenarios if it means a simpler interface for the majority of users. > Your proposal doesn't make sense, because it changes the behavior of the > server relative to other servers (including our own 1.1 server.) It > will only cause confusion. That ship has already sailed as you made some changes what the compression levels mean with regard to sub-rectangles, as well as changes to the general compression method logic. In my world, the settings on the client express an intent with regards to relative trade-offs between CPU, bandwidth and quality. It does not express an expectation of specific actions on the server. Since your findings have concluded that 6 (or possibly 3) is the point where more CPU doesn't really give a reduction in bandwidth, that should be the maximum for the CPU/bandwidth trade-off IMO. > > If I really had my way, we'd hide 4-6 as well, as those are only useful > in very rare corner cases. Hiding only 7-9 is a compromise. > > I spent hundreds of hours coming to my conclusion, so it's going to take > more than a few minutes of reasoning for you to convince me otherwise. I'm not arguing the results of your findings, just how the interface should be presented to the user. I'd like these two goals to be met: a) Users upgrading shouldn't be punished because of older defaults. b) Users shouldn't have to tweak their settings when switching between a TigerVNC server and other ones. I'm hoping these aren't conflicting goals. Rgds -- Pierre Ossman OpenSource-based Thin Client Technology System Developer Telephone: +46-13-21 46 00 Cendio AB Web: http://www.cendio.com A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Doing More with Less: The Next Generation Virtual Desktop What are the key obstacles that have prevented many mid-market businesses from deploying virtual desktops? How do next-generation virtual desktops provide companies an easier-to-deploy, easier-to-manage and more affordable virtual desktop model.http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfnl/114/51426474/
_______________________________________________ Tigervnc-devel mailing list Tigervnc-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/tigervnc-devel
