Good to hear. In the coming weeks, I'll be doing some research to quantify this and to evaluate whether the new multi-threaded decoding stuff in TigerVNC 1.7.x is worth emulating (I strongly suspect it isn't-- I've been down that road before.) This will be in the context of laying the groundwork for a cross-platform native viewer.
On 3/17/17 9:37 PM, Steve Volumetric wrote: > DRC - thanks for putting all this together, by the way. I'm a big fan. > Unrelated, I gave up on trying to compile the turbovnc viewer from > source (my linux distro is too weird) and I got up and running off your > precompiled rpm that I pried apart. You're right - the performance is a > staggering improvement over TigerVNC even with the java dependency! > > On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 9:34 PM, DRC <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > The Windows viewer has a pure C++ version, but other platforms require > Java at the moment. Why is that a limitation? It's as fast as our > native viewer and considerably faster than TigerVNC's native viewer on > Mac platforms. I am looking at a cross-platform native viewer in the > long term, probably based on our Windows code but ported to some > cross-platform toolkit like GTK. For now, however, Mac and Linux > require Java. > > On 3/17/17 6:22 PM, Steve Volumetric wrote: > > I'm hoping the viewer isn't completely java dependent, though so far > > that's the only way I've been able to build it. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot _______________________________________________ TurboVNC-Users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/turbovnc-users
