Please configure your mailer such that it responds directly and clearly
to list. I suspect this may have been forwarded by a list admin, in
which case, I'd strongly recommend you subscribe to the list.
on Tue, May 31, 2005 at 01:18:52PM -0400, Hans Paijmans (J.J.Paijmans@xxxxxx) wrote:
> Jimmy Pierre wrote:
> ...
>
> > - X server. Install an X server on the legacy MS Windows box. You
> > then connect to a GNU/Linux system for applications. Using XDMCP
> > (X display manager control protocol) will provide the user with a
> > user/pass login. This is probably your best bet and the most
> > widely used solution.
> >
> > Advantages: simple, low cost, fast, low server load, many users
> > per server (20-40+).
> > Disadvantages: unsecured, not appropriate for open / unswitched
> > networks. May be tunneled over SSH for security.
> >
> > - VNC Users run VNC client on desktop, connect to VNC server.
> > Running servers out of inetd / xinetd allows for automated
> > connections (but no session persistance).
> >
> > Advantages: minimal client software.
> > Disadvantages: heavier server load, slower than X, unsecured,
> > fewer clients / server than X. May be tunneled over SSH for
> > security.
> >
> > - NoMachines "NX". Haven't used it, though it's supposed to be
> > faster/lighter than VNC, and offers built-in security.
> >
>
>
> I am familiar with the straight X server solution, and over a Cable
> connection its speed is unworkable.
There are a number of options to speed X over slow connections, most
specifically 'lbxproxy', which you might want to investigate.
Tunnelling over SSH with a fast cipher (blowfish) and compression may
also speed overall performance, though both will introduce some latency.
> VNC also is slow,
Likewise, there are options to improve its speed, including both
compression stream and jpeg compression, at a cost to image quality.
> and I never understood the purpose of it, at least
> not for my kind of work.
VNC fits the niche of "provides remote access in a client / server
agnostic fashion". There are VNC clients and servers for a wide range
of platforms, including GNU/Linux, legacy MS Windows, MacOS, PalmOS, and
others. It doesn't require an X server, and allows sharing the current
desktop on many platforms. I believe it shares its fundamental
mechanics with legacy MS Windows's remote desktop.
NX very nearly fills the same niche.
X differs in that while it _can_ allow a full-session remote access, it
will also allow remote access on a client-by-client
(application-by-application) basis. That is: you can run your primary
desktop on one system, but access other apps from arbitrary different
systems, either local or remote.
> I only heard about the NX server today, so I downloaded the FreeNX
> server and a few clients for Linux and Windows.
> From my point of view it offers access to a linux desktop over Cable
> at very good speeds, both from Linux and Windows and it blows X right
> out of the water. The documentation at Berloz.de is a bit scanty and I
> still am not certain what is possible or impossible with it. But it
> looks very, very good.
The main downside to NX is that it seems to lack for free software
implementations. My understanding is that it's a proprietary system.
From a strategic perspecitive, since it's so close to a number of
alternatives (X, SSH forwarding, VNC, WTS), and focuses on an area
(cross-platform remote access) which is relatively obscure. It's a
tough space for a proprietary solution.
While it's been kicking around for a few years, it really hasn't taken
off. No reason not to use it, but it tends to keep my enthusiasm
dampened.
Peace.
--
Karsten M. Self <kmself@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> http://kmself.home.netcom.com/
What Part of "Gestalt" don't you understand?
Any time a business operation fails to meet its objective, it is the
management team's failure -- not the subordinates working for them.
- Karen Shaeffer, explaining No Excuses Management[TM]
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature