[opensource-dev] Faster for people with crappy internet? (was Re: Overview of JPEG 2000 codec

[Tateru Nino]

On 2/10/2010 5:22 AM, Brian McGroarty wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 1, 2010 at 11:41 AM, Ponzu <lee.ponzu at gmail.com 
> <mailto:lee.ponzu at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     On Fri, Oct 1, 2010 at 1:06 PM, Thomas Grimshaw
>     <tom at streamsense.net <mailto:tom at streamsense.net>> wrote:
>
>          On 01/10/2010 18:04, Ponzu wrote:
>
>             Nobody has crappier internet than I (satellite).
>
>
>         Well, we're really talking about transfer caps, here, rather
>         than available bandwidth.
>
>         Available bandwidth can be appeased by the network slider.
>          But transfer caps are the biggest problem, and pretty much
>         everyone in Australia is affected, and a lot of people on the
>         less decent ISP's in the UK.
>
>
>     and me.  17GB per 30 day period, in a sliding window.
>     Point is still that caps will be increased as time goes on (or
>     decreased, as international economic system collapses, but taht is
>     a differnt sim).
>
>
> Devs concerned about crazy-limited connections shouldn't worry about 
> the small changes that may someday come with a different image CODEC. 
> They can cut texture transfers in half -today- at the expense of 
> texture blurriness.
>
> A test should be straightforward, if anyone feels strongly enough to 
> take a whack at it. Add a "texture fidelity" slider that scales the 
> measure the viewer uses to decide what discard level it wants. See 
> where you still find it tolerable.
I read that three times, with different reactions. After a little 
thought, though, yes. I'd _totally_ use that if it were an option. Right 
on the main UI next to a draw-distance slider.

-- 
Tateru Nino
http://dwellonit.taterunino.net/

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20101002/36945140/attachment.htm