Your Digital Media Has Never Looked So Good

 
renojim
** Valued Community Member **
Topic Author
Posts: 3491
Joined: Mon Feb 15, 2010 1:35 pm

Screensaver performance vs. normal channel

Wed Aug 25, 2010 2:47 am

Well I just finished up a screensaver I've been working on and I'm very disappointed. I developed it as a normal channel so I could start it whenever I wanted without having to go into the main settings and I pretty much just changed "RunUserInterface" to "RunScreensaver" and the performance as a screensaver doesn't come anywhere near the performance as a normal channel. So I guess my question is, what is the performance penalty of running an application as a screensaver?

-JT
 
User avatar
TheEndless
** Valued Community Member **
Posts: 9231
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2004 10:15 am
Location: US
Contact:

Re: Screensaver performance vs. normal channel

Wed Aug 25, 2010 6:15 am

I think that probably depends on whatever is running in the background when your screensaver launches. When you developed it as a normal channel, you were giving it full priority as the only thing running on the system. When it runs as a screensaver, however, it's in a separate thread that doesn't get the same priority as the main thread. I've noticed that having an roAudioPlayer running in the background has a significant impact on the performance of an roImageCanvas. I also noted in another thread that the roOneLineDialog also eats up a lot of CPU when the ShowBusyAnimation is being displayed, so there are any number of things that could be running in the main thread that could hinder the performance of the screensaver thread.
My Channels: http://roku.permanence.com - Twitter: @TheEndlessDev
Instant Watch Browser (NetflixIWB), Aquarium Screensaver (AQUARIUM), Clever Clocks Screensaver (CLEVERCLOCKS), iTunes Podcasts (ITPC), My Channels (MYCHANNELS)
 
renojim
** Valued Community Member **
Topic Author
Posts: 3491
Joined: Mon Feb 15, 2010 1:35 pm

Re: Screensaver performance vs. normal channel

Wed Aug 25, 2010 12:32 pm

I realize that, but I would assume pretty much nothing is running during a "preview" or while the UI is sitting at the top level channel menu. It's pretty frustrating. I spent a lot of time on this only to find it's pretty much useless when changed to a screensaver.

-JT
 
User avatar
gonzotek
** Valued Community Member **
Posts: 2206
Joined: Thu May 06, 2010 12:40 pm
Contact:

Re: Screensaver performance vs. normal channel

Wed Aug 25, 2010 1:08 pm

renojim wrote:
I realize that, but I would assume pretty much nothing is running during a "preview" or while the UI is sitting at the top level channel menu. It's pretty frustrating. I spent a lot of time on this only to find it's pretty much useless when changed to a screensaver.

-JT
Doesn't the box do background updating and such(so that even if one never enters the channel store, the box will still silently update channels, and firmware)? I can see the screensaver thread being deliberately throttled so other functions can be prioritized. Although, if that's correct, I'd agree that if nothing else was happening, the screensaver thread might as well get top priority.
Remoku.tv - A free web app for Roku Remote Control!
Want to control your Roku from nearly any phone, computer or tablet? Get started at http://help.remoku.tv
by Apps4TV - Applications for television and beyond: http://www.apps4tv.com

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests