Re: 8-bit vs. 24-bit on new Sun hardware.
>>>> "Kyle" == Kyle Jones
<kyle_jones(a)wonderworks.com> writes:
Kyle> Martin Buchholz writes:
> xwininfo on a netscape window:
> Depth: 24
> Visual Class: TrueColor
>
> xwininfo on a xemacs window:
> Depth: 8
> Visual Class: PseudoColor
>
> As a result, display of images in XEmacs is noticeably suboptimal.
> How do we fix this?
Kyle> Should we fix it? The user might have chosen an 8-bit display
Kyle> for a reason. One reason, 24-bit displays have in the past been
Kyle> noticably slower than 8-bit displays. So if we do this thing of
Kyle> evil, will XEmacs scroll slower, display images slower, etc.?
At least on a Sun, the following is true:
- I've run a 24-bit default visual for a year, with no ill effects,
performance-wise.
- A Sun person admitted to me that the defauylt visual was 8-bit for
compatibility with legacy software, not performance considerations.
Given that, the visual XEmacs should choose, in the absence of a
command line `-visual' option, is the best visual available on the
display.
Martin