Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 57

Thread: WWJ SDK Alpha 4.1 - 0.4.1 available

  1. #41
    WWJ Technical Manager
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    1,106

    Default Upcoming release

    There will be an update to the code prior to JavaOne (May 5). We're calling it 0.5. Too much has been going on, mostly on the server side, to have done it sooner.

    This updated version will point to new Solaris and Linux servers providing core imagery via WMS rather than the proprietary, single-platform, never ending maintenance headache tile server system we've suffered with. It will also point to an updated WFS server for placenames. The WMS server code is part of the release. (But it's very specific for WWJ needs, and not a general purpose solution like you'd get from GeoTools.) Both of these new servers use Squid for caching. We've also arranged for very high performance mirrored hosting, which will go on line in late May.

    When we release 1.0 we expect to place it in a public subversion system.

    Thanks for your patience. Non uno die roma aedificata est.

  2. #42

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tag View Post
    ...
    Thanks for your patience. Non uno die roma aedificata est.
    tag,
    Thanks for the response! Glad to hear that changes aren't going to be too dramatic. Looking forward to the release.
    Rome may not have been built in a day, but it sure burned down fast (just kidding) This project is the most exciting thing I have seen come along ... well for as long as I remember.
    Thanks!
    -tve
    ~
    Some images of WWJ stuff I have been working on...
    http://picasaweb.google.com/tve9999/...35840816720994

  3. #43
    WWJ Consultant patmurris's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Saint-Paul de Vence, Alpes Maritimes, France
    Posts
    3,395

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tag View Post
    ...the proprietary, single-platform, never ending maintenance headache tile server system we've suffered with.
    I can think of some very french ways to say that
    My World Wind Java Blog & WW.net Plugins page

  4. #44
    WWJ Technical Manager
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    1,106

    Default

    Good. I've said them in all the languages I know.

  5. #45
    Cosmic Overlord bull's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    2,361

    Default

    Hmm, how is this going to affect WW .NET, will we need to point to the new servers or make code changes?

  6. #46
    WWJ Technical Manager
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    1,106

    Default

    This will not affect WW.net at all. It and WWJ are two completely separate efforts. Nothing WWJ does ever affects WW.net. (We no longer provide development for WW.net. We currently just keep the servers it uses running.)

  7. #47
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    147

    Default

    I guess the correct question is *can* we point a WMS layer at the new servers for WW.Net and make it an official new datasource? Are they better, faster, stronger?

    adam...
    Adam Hill - .NET and GIS Guy
    Thregecy Inc. ::: TheBigPixel
    Hack #24 - World Wind

  8. #48
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Mojave & Oxnard California
    Posts
    2,783

    Default

    From my experience going the other way, pulling data from the WW.net server into WWJ, there should only be a few code changes to be able to get data from the WWJ server into WW.net. It is basically the same data except served in the .dds format.

    To answer this question since the .dds format is bigger:
    Quote Originally Posted by adamhill View Post
    Are they better, faster, stronger?
    The tile sizes are bigger, Bigger, BIGGER!

  9. #49
    Cosmic Overlord bull's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    2,361

    Default

    so it will be slower and use more bandwidth? Wha about the quality? Are the dds tiles using less compression hence giving better quality, or is it more of a technical issue?

  10. #50
    WWJ Consultant patmurris's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Saint-Paul de Vence, Alpes Maritimes, France
    Posts
    3,395

    Default

    As i understand, the advantage with dds is fast loading from disk to the gpu for better interactivity (needs less cpu processing then jpegs for instance). However, the WMS server should be able to provide other images formats, so it should be no problem for WW.net to tap into it, at least to see how it compares.
    My World Wind Java Blog & WW.net Plugins page

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. WWJ SDK Alpha 4 - 0.4.0 available
    By patmurris in forum WWJ Release Announcements
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 09-21-2010, 02:48 PM
  2. WWJ SDK Alpha 3 - 0.3.0 available
    By patmurris in forum WWJ Release Announcements
    Replies: 35
    Last Post: 12-03-2007, 08:56 PM
  3. 1.3.2 alpha 2 released
    By Jessi in forum Developers' Corner
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: 02-02-2006, 07:27 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •