We continue to use Tight encoding with good results. One good
result I hoped might happen has: Tight lets us run a larger screen
(higher resolution) and have better productivity.
This seeming contradictory course of events results from the
nature of our primary software. The software is a terminal
emulator that knows about the screen size. Being a terminal
emulator, it has a fixed number of character positions and a
constant information density. When the resolution is too small
to support a full terminal window, the terminal is cut (in
software, of course) and a scroll bar appears. The user has to
scroll to get full use of the terminal.
Using a larger number of pixels (twice as many, actually)
actually lowers the information density of the screen at the same
time the need to scroll disappears. Lower information density means
better compression. With the hidden cursor control, moving the
cursor across twice as many pixels does not result in a time
penalty. The scroll bar goes away too, further lowering the
information density of the screen. The overall refresh time is
about the same, but the required number of refreshes has
diminished. During startup, where the full-color splash screen is
displayed, redraw is slower, but in most other cases redraw is
faster.
Other compression schemes might be best for full-color mode,
but for a simple terminal emulator, Tight is a clear winner. The
mode is 800 by 600, 256 color; refresh time is about a half a second
over 20k dial-up link!
Frank Evan Perdicaro, KF6JGX Dainippon Screen Engineering of America
BSP, MSCE; old GMC, Chevy&Hawk w/V 17942 Cowan Ave
inhouse: frank@server, x258 Irvine CA
outhouse: [EMAIL PROTECTED], 949-477-4800x258 92614 DoD:1097
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, send a message with the line: unsubscribe vnc-list
to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
See also: http://www.uk.research.att.com/vnc/intouch.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------
