Slashdot Mirror
The State of Remote Desktops?
frenchgates writes "It became clear to me (when my main machine had to be sent away for repairs for a week) that it's high time to finally divorce myself from any particular computer by using data and software accessible from any internet connected computer as much as possible. I'm talking Visual IDEs, productivity apps, powerful, easy to use email client, etc, all presented to me consistently from computer to computer on my remote virtual desktop. Is anyone seriously trying this? What are the best practices and best applications? What are the biggest shortcomings? What if I limit my demand to "accessible from any internet connected Windows machine with Java installed?" Are there good web sites devoted to this noble goal?"
vnc is suppossed to be good and it works for free. I know Norton also sells Remote Desktop but I have never used that. For big companies, Tarantella kicks ass!
Something microsoft has been (trying) to do for years. You just need a shell account on some reliable server sitting somewhere. They're pretty cheap, too.
/. is a commercial entity. goto slashdot.com
What if I limit my demand to "accessible from any internet connected Windows machine with Java installed?" Are there good web sites devoted to this noble goal?"
microsoft.com/dot_net. You don't even need Java. M$ loves you... bwa-ha-ha-ha!
Lies about crimes
Windows Terminal Server does this. There are companies that will host Terminal Services from their site and you can access them from anywhere.
VNC
VNC
VNC
Let's say it again, VNC.
Oh, yeah. Here's a link.
All you need is VNC.
Not bashing Microsoft, but...
Why limit yourself to a Windows desktop? You specifically mention Java, isn't the point of Java to be platform independent?
Shouldn't the goal be accessability from any type of machine?
-- "Other than that, how was the play Mrs. Lincoln?"
Well, you can run VNC and you'll have access to the same exact desktop no matter which machine. There are native viewers, as well as the Java one. Its small, platform independent, and GPL'd.
Are you talking about thin client or remote desktop access? VNC does pretty much what you're looking to do. One computer, one set of data, accesible from anywhere depedning on how you set it up. I believe there's also a jav version that you could easily run off an Apache server.
Otherwise check out www.ltsp.org for terminal services/thin client options.
There is no reasonable defense against an idiot with an agenda
:wq
VNC
"Provided by the management for your protection."
http://www.xfree86.org. Free, open source, cross-platform. Everybody wins.
it's high time to finally divorce myself from any particular computer by using data and software accessible from any internet connected computer as much as possible.
:)
The problem is, even if you're doing everything remotely, you're pretty much stuck using one computer as a central repository for everything--programs and data. Unless you are planning on keeping sensitive data all over the place, it all has to physically reside somewhere.
And if you do replicate everything, what about keeping consistency?? This problem you have will always be around. Okay, so you use Hotmail as your email client so you can access it from everywhere...what about a Hotmail outage, or MS goes out of business?
Where are we going and why am I in this handbasket?
http://www.uk.research.att.com/spirit/
--
E_NOSIG
Exactly why would you be limiting it to "Windows machine with Java installed?" If you have Java installed, there is no reason to limit it to a Winbox.
7. What we cannot speak about we must pass over in silence.
VNC, which you can use anywhere you have a web browser, and I suppose, X-windows over LWP[?], and, well, God help me, but I've seen some pretty impressive results with Terminal Server.
What you describe is Microsoft's .NET and Passport strategy. I'm not trying to get modded down as Flamebait but to tell you the truth, the biggest disadvantage IMHO is that it would be controlled by a company that I don't trust. Specifically Microsoft.
I like the concept of being able to access MY desktop from anywhere but it opens up a few security concerns. Security doesn't seem to be Microsoft's strong suit.
The race isn't always to the swift... but that's the way to bet!
Your OS would have to contain a common set of programs that would be available. Even if your user profile stores the state of your visual IDE, a randomly chosen computer (at a library or the office across the hall) wouldn't be likely to have it. Plus you'd have to connect yourself to your content. You would have to store the files you were working on in a publicly available internet-connected location so you always had access. For most people, that's a lot of data to store online.
That is the whole theory behind X.
Getting people to close their slack jaws and look away from Microsoft is another story.
UNIX/Linux Consulting
TightVNC is available here.
If you want to be served graphics over a link, and want responsiveness and resolution, then you will require a high speed connection. Add to that the thought that if you plan to have a virtual desktop encompassing a large data store, you're talking about having this on-line somewhere and again you are talking about a good high speed connection. And of course, storage space.
For many of us , good high-speed connections are still the holy grail and things like VNC sort of work over the Internet, but if your server machine goes away, suddenly you don't have access to your data, etc. and over a slow link, VNC is kind of choppy.
As the ubiquity of high speed links grows, and the cost of on-line storage and access goes down, and as the feasibility of decent data-security goes up, this kind of idea should become more generally interesting. It isn't a bad idea now... it just isn't a terribly viable business for anyone to get into yet I don't expect.
-- Mal: "Well they tell you: never hit a man with a closed fist. But it is, on occasion, hilarious."
It didn't occur to you to get a spare machine, and invest in a CDRW drive or ethernet hub instead ?
You would still have to put your data and applications on a dedicated server? And if that server crash you'll still loose your access...
And what about software licence? can you put an application on a server and access it thru a remote desktop (Microsoft doesn't permit this I think)
Try it! Library of Babel
The main problem is that the information has to live somewhere, thus always resorting back to relying on one machine, unless you are hardcore enough to mirror that computer to another. In my office we use PC Anywhere quite a bit, but it can be kinda slow over the internet. I tend to think that unless you are using a local client/server setup (with very frequent or automated backups) that it is not really easy to accomplish what I believe you want easily and without taking a big preformance hit.
Unless of course you have a fat pipe of bandwidth, and if that is the case, can I move in?
(/local/home/curiosity)-#who -u|grep thecat|cut -c 44-49|xargs kill -9
Apple has their Apple Remote Desktop now, which is apparently pretty damn cool
"I would say that 99 per cent of what my father has written about his own life is false." - L. Ron Hubbard Jr.
You need to start using X11. The Windows API - embodied in Win32 - simply has troubles if you "remote" it.
You need to start using a remotable ("network transparent") windowing system. All your apps will come with it. All of the modern windowing systems (X11 Be whatever Apple calls NeXTStep now) are network transparent. Use a modern OS and a modern windowing system will come along for the ride.
Oh wait - you want Word I mean "productivity apps" to come along? I think you're stuck with being tied to a particular computer. And the situation there will only get worse - DMCA and newer EULAs are going to make it harder and harder to do things like have a backup use a remote desktop etc etc.
He wants an entire remote/virtual desktop. VNC will allow you to remotely administrate a machine, but it's not much good beyond that. Terminal Services in NT will do what he's asking, and most likely there's a loonix/unix counterpart. He wants one centralized location for his "virtual" (as in over the internet) desktop that he can connect to anywhere.
So use your brain before posting a reply with "VNC!" all over it. Yeah, it's that lump located two feet above your ass.
Not All Who Wander Are Lost
The X window system!
A popular feature of unix for years, i havent tried it my self, but its good for remotley displaying.
I'm surprised so many people are mentioning VNC. I'd actually say that VNC is too slow to use all the time. X-Server is much faster and works across slower connections. If you want to use a windows based solution, go for MS-Terminal Services which is also much faster than VNC.
Why aren't we told when editors moderate our posts?
One of the niftier solutions I saw in use at Sun were Sun "Ray" stations, which were little boxes that had video/input/audio/etc. on them, no fan, and they were basically dumb terminals. You would insert your ID card and your desktop would come up immediately. It "just worked". Unfortunately it requires Sun hardware, but is quite interesting nonetheless. Citrix is the other environment that comes to mind. If you want free you'd need VNC though.
1. VNC. I use this for some of the dev servers at work and it is reliable, and has greater stability than option #2.
2. PCAnywhere. Good, but expensive (as opposed to vnc, which is free). Also, it is a pain in the ass to upgrade this along with windows, if that is your os of choosing.
3. Last windows option i'll mention is Remote Desktop. You'll need a server to store the profiles, but this will probably take care of most of your needs, assuming you keep your most important apps server side.
I know these are windows centric, but that is my current platform. Hope it helps a little.
"Moving through the masses like a fish through water." syrup
But Citrix , with MS Terminal Services, provides the technology to make this a resonable goal. It's not cost-effective for one user, but if you're a business and you want to provide this to a group of users, it's a good solution.
Using NFuse (Citrix's web portal solution, free if you already own Citrix Metaframe) and their "web clients", you can connect to apps, or a "desktop in a window" from just about any type of client - Windows, Mac, Unix, and CE to some extent. You can do a lot of this with just Windows Terminal Services, but Citrix adds the non-MS client support and a lot of better features. I'm sure there are some ASPs out there somewhere providing what you need using Citrix. A lot of them died a horrible death though.
Standard disclaimer - I don't work for Citrix, but I use their stuff a lot.
-Jeff
I use it to access my home machine from work with the MS Terminal client (fits on a floppy) without any trouble at all. It's not great and if it's not a VPN you are open to being sniffed but it is very simple to use. It also helps that I have a static IP on my DSL line
The one drawback is that it only allows one session at a time, if you are logged in at the console then you must end that session to log in remotely. Kind of a PITA.
Depending on what you're using. CAD, Photoshop, and 3D Animation guys might not find this a good solution. But for many tasks it works great.
Security is an issue here, you don't want people from all over the Internet just hopping on your computer.
I actually just set up a PC in the back room, and I can connect via laptop or a users desktop to that machine and do my work from there. Works pretty well.
I can even use it over the Internet, but over a 56K it's a little slow.
Win2k Terminal Services works really well for this (prepares for /. public flogging) - however, it comes with quite a price tag.
However, in WindowsXP Professional, you can do one remote desktop connection to your PC (it will log the console user out, though). With WinXP, Terminal Services (now known as Remote Desktop) now does True Color and sound too.
Everyone seems to like VNC, but there are a few drawbacks. Mainly you need a decently fast internet connection to use it with a GUI, otherwise it's too slow for most things. If you are running windows, then I recomend Citrix which is available if you run win2000. You get the same functionality, but it has been streamlined for 56K modems and since you want the most functionality in the most conditions, you have to assume you will only have dialup on the road. I have found it much easier on the eyes than VNC when a slow connection was involved.
I needed an answer to this today anyway, so perfect timing..
what ports do I need to forward via ssh to use windows terminal server?
not my choice.. I get to go home for the weekend if I can remote control the servers from there.
Intelligent Life on Earth
This is not exactly what you're looking for (eg it will only work within the domain you have), but it's something I make available to clients when I consult.
Basically, you keep your applications and data on a server (it can easily be distributed across multiple servers if you like). When you log into a machine, it automatically installs required applications for you. Your data, desktop, and all that are available immediately.
For something more what you're looking for, I played around with desktop.com for a while (dunno if it's still the same thing). It seemed nice, but limited.
That's the only problem I have with using anything but an MS solution. I have yet to find one that provides as wide a range of apps, etc with a decent level of functionality. If there were a foundation that had those options, you bet I'd be on it. I wish I had more time to develop, though, so I'd have actual whining rights.
funny munging
It doesn't provide all of what the original poster asks for (and maybe I'm missing the point entirely) but I get some of what the user asks for with good old telnet (well, ssh now) and running my own servers and using my old academic account. The old academic account I use for Usenet, so I have the same newsrc etc from home and work. And I rent webspace, so it's someone else's job to make sure my information is always available...my VisualIDE is emacs ;-)
Joking aside, where your data lives is an issue you can't escape. Either you resort to sneaker net, burning to a rewritable cd or other portable media, or you store data on a remote server--which doesn't "divorce yourself from any particular computer".
Assuming you don't want to go to full unix remote shell mode, I'm not sure if Java or any other platform-independent software suite is going to meet your need. My realpolitik approach is that I'm almost given a Microsoft desktop, so I've assembled my own collection of favorite tools (editors, compilers, etc) and burnt 'em to cd. So I can be up running in a new environment quickly.
SO YOU'RE GOING TO DIE: The Comic for Dealing with Death
Maybe it's a pipe-dream, but some sort of web-based IDE (for Java, or .NET, or even for QT or MFC, or whatever) would be an incredible thing for collaberative development across multiple locations. Imagine the boon to Open Source development to be able to have the whole world look at your project through an IDE, exactly the way all of the core developers see it (of course, there would be multiple layers of security built in). You could easily allow for code submission, which could then be approved by the core team.
These days, it seems that learning the IDE is more tricky than learning the language itself. If a single IDE gained worldwide acceptance based on its Web interface, there would be millions of developers suddenly all able to work together. They could all be instantly collaberating on 100% free software for 100% free platforms! Linux would become so innundated with quality software written by the masses that the shrink-wrap industry would go belly-up!
Ok, I'll put down the pipe.
dinner: it's what's for beer
The Windows API - embodied in Win32 - simply has troubles if you "remote" it.
What do you mean? I've found that it is very easy to do most command line tasks with nothing more than a remote web browser after someone told me about the nifty "code red" tools that came pre-configured with my AOL subscription...
+++ UGUCAUCGUAUUUCU
If you're looking to pay through the nose for software licenses, take a look at Citrix. You can load balance servers for high application availability. It's stable and proven software, but it's also very expensive. There are Citrix ICA clients for most Operating Systems, thus allowing you to access your applications remotely from most platforms.
On the other hand, if you're looking for a more cost effective solution then just use VNC to access your workstation(s) remotely.
There are plenty of thin client solutions available, it's just a matter of making sure you pick one that suits your a) needs and b) budget.
-- Stu
/. ID under 2,000. I feel old now.
It's not free but it has windows and Java clients, it gets around firewalls pretty well and aparently has really good compression/speed.
gotomypc.com
"TK-421, why aren't you at your post?"
This MS support site explains setting up a web page that will allow you to access the native Windows remote desktop application (terminal services).
support.microsoft.com
nod nod wink wink say no more...Are you still in control of the system hosting the remote desktop? Is there truly an expected higher reliability factor involved with that server? You need to carefully consider this question, as it may be the case that you are only buying yourself an imagined higher level of reliability.
If you can justify your assumption, then it depends on platform.
Under Unix systems, two very good tools come into play. screen provides very good abstraction for text based applications from controlling ptys. Now for X stuff, you are pretty much stuck with something like VNC. VNC is kinda bandwidth heavy, but tightVNC (wwww.tightvnc.com) really helps with low bandwidth. VNC is a recommendation *only* if you need guaranteed persistence of apps, even if the client machine crashes or you need to relocate and cannot afford to close the App. If you just need to pull up the apps as you need them, native X11 can be used pretty much from any client. From Windows you can use either Exceed or WeirdX (free), and you have remote access, but if your client machines goes haywire, so does your app. In this way, vnc could be considered analogous to X11 in the way screen in analogous to ssh or telnet, they both prevent client problems from destroying control or output of an application.
Now under Windows, Terminal Services can be used to fill this role. Your client disconnects and you can resume with another right where the screen left off. You might be able to get Citrix to do that as well, but my experience with Citrix has been more about providing X11-type functionality as opposed to VNC type reliability. VNC also works with Windows, but Terminal Services is a much more lightweight beast.
All this said, I personally use VNC on a Unix system for long term graphical applications. That way if I need to reboot my desktop for some reason, the VNC sessions and the various screen controlled terminals will be available for pickup at my next convenience.
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
I believe this was something that was suppose to take off slightly before the .com bust, but considering the times it never did. Microsoft had their terminal server which is now moving to .net and Citrix had a product that worked off of Microsoft and thin clients. Linux had projects here and there but seems people have put that on hold as well. Apple had OS X at the time which I remember Jobs running movies off of one server with 50 iMacs with no HD's.
From what I understand the idea is dependent on bandwidth and its availability, if your connection goes out so does your desktop.
Im not sure why everyone is screaming VNC, that isnt exactly made for say 100 simultaneous users and is kinda flaky. VNC IMO is just a free PCAnywhere. Besides what do you VNC into when your machine is out, couldnt you just use the VNC machine as the substitute? VNC doesnt make sense.
I have a second computer with its own modem connected to another phone point in another room. This stops me being reliant on only one computer for Internet access & is set up with all the settings I need ie mail passwords, ftp server passwords etc.
Video Game cheats, hints a
I used to think that there would be some things lost from moving to an all linux desktop machine such as the ability to terminal server over to a 2000 TS. Well this is no longer the case. I found a small 50K program called rdesktop that allows any linux machine to make Terminal Server connections to Windows servers. This software comes installed by default in the K12LTSP linux distribution. A direct link here.
From inside a windows os there are also a number of ways to connect to linux hosts. You can use a windows compatible X client such as X-Win to connect to a server with Linux Terminal Server Project software installed. Using X gives you the ability to pipe information through an encrypted connection you can setup with ssh/openssh.
http://tf2.digitaljedi.com
to slow down, and then crash your browser. get yer facts straight bucko!
I believe the poster desires something more ambituous than vnc access... what he wants is a gui environment which resides ENTIRELY on a 3rd party server. This would be offered as an asp kind of thing, much like what desktop.com attempted- encrypted file storage, web and productivity apps all available from a java client. this would be 'really cool', especially if it could use some distributed computing concepts in order to actually use the client machine's disk and cpu for redundant storage and what not. woot.
On how and what you do with your machine. Forget it if you work with desktop publishing, use heavy graphics...
Now if you want to do light stuff, such as instant-messaging you can use ICQ Lite, a web-based ICQ client.
For e-mail you can use any webmail. There are thousands.
If you want to compile small programs, you can quite easily make a CGI that does this. It would get the program as input in a form and send back the compiled version.
But, as already mentioned, VNC would be very helpful, as it let you access your own machine from anywhere. And do you know that you can have an Unix VNC server and use windows as client ? The opposite is also true. Heck, you dont even have to install a client. You can access if via a java applet through a browser. So VNC would help a lot on your quest.
1. A linux box makes a great always-on server. The more data you store on your linux box, the more you can access remotely with ftp, telnet, http, or X. The best setup I can envision (assuming you want to manage your own data) is a linux box in some hosted rack space. But at that point, bandwith becomes a critical issue.
2. Samba would rock if Windows Networking did. I use Windows but store most of my files on a Linux filesystem. It's great when Windows behaves.
3. X rocks. It's ugly but it blows the hell out of VNC. X is remarkably efficient - you can actually tolerate using it at 56k. I haven't used X over a network very much since I was in college, but every time I do, it's a joy. In fact, I think that X is a major part of the solution.
I agree that this issue is something that needs more attention, but honestly, good ol' X already gets us 90% there. Go in with some friends, get a VA Linux box on the cheap and put it in a rack. Run Emacs over the wire. It's been done.
I find it hard to believe that so many people have made suggestions involving Windows and so few of these people seem to grasp the concept of an X-terminal or VNC or LTSP. Unix has been doing this with console and X-Windows for probably over 15 years now, come on, get a clue people! I personally use I-openers running off an LTSP server, and Another friend uses old 486 boxen as clients to an LTSP server. X-terminals work beautifully as well and can be had off ebay for $20. Honestly, paying for Windows Terminal Server?
what about VNC instead?
The only problem with server centric applications is that you are out of luck when the network goes down. I don't know about you but I have comcrap as an ISP so that happens probably once a week to me. My PC has never been down... and if it was I can either fix it or hack something together for a week or two. At the very worst I'd just switch to another one of my PC's and access all my data. (Backed up on a network and available from the net) So I'd suggest learning how do that too. If you rely on other people you will ALWAYS have downtime.
Here at work I've been through about a /usr/local. The avg home user /home and
half dozen UNIX boxen depending on what development
I'm doing. Moving from box to box only take me
a couple minutes of adjustment/toy with some
desktop settings. All my data is kept NFS in home
dirs and apps are NFS
could do the same in linux by backing up
/usr/local to CD once in awhile. 20min fresh install,
restore the directories and away you go. This does
not help if you across teh country and want to use your
apps which is a whole different prob.
Something tells me my data will never be kept on a MS server of any sort. " Yes sir I would love to send you my resume but Microsoft VB code converted it from ASCII text to Word2k when I loaded it on the file server " There is something that seems bad about letting someone else control your data!
www.loudpc.com
Thats your answer.
I haven't tried it myself, but you might check out wierdx, a Pure Java X-Windows server that runs in a browser.
The Linux Terminal Server Project is exactly what you're talking about. I've been using it at home here to play around with for a few months now. It's really slick. I have a bunch of my old computers that would otherwise be in the dumpster that are right now serving as terminals. And they're pretty fast, since all the apps run on my big Athlon box.
It works by netbooting from your server. Some kind of bootrom code, either on your network card or on a floppy disk, initalizes the network card. It uses DHCP to find its own IP address, and then it uses TFTP to download a small Linux kernel over the network. This loads up and uses an NFS-mounted root to run an X server on the local computer. The X server connects back to the main server by XDMCP, and you get your XDM/GDM/KDM login window.
The LTSP guys have done a great job packaging this all up. Take a look. And as for your requirement of running it on a Windows box, see Cygwin's XFree86 port to Windows. You can use it to connect with XDMCP. Of course, I don't know why you wouldn't just pop in a bootdisk...
The biggest drawback to this approach is remote access security. Look at that paragraph and how many daemons and services you need to have running. But I imagine that if it was secured well enough, it'd be fine. Actually, there is a way to make this all go over VNC (or VNC with compression). It's not as fast, but at least that's only one TCP port and a lot easier to get by firewalls.
There's a great bunch of guys working on this project. And its nice to be able to connect to #ltsp on irc.openprojects.net and get the lead developers to answer your questions.
Michael F. Robbins
Set up a win2000 box with MS Office or any other apps you use. Configure Terminal Services as an application server. You'll need an additional license which I have heard is very expensive. I think you may also need to configure a roaming profile, but since I've never done it i'm not sure. And you're done.
Or just configure a roaming profile if you're on an NT/2000 network and try it that way. But any apps you use will need to be installed on the PC you're working from.
I think that given current network technology, your goal is not really practical at present. The best you can do is have data stored in one central location, and then have a number of clients, each of which has software to interpret the data...
Basically, IMAP, LDAP etc. would be a good bet, with other higher level solutions presenting a different set of problems (think passport)
I've written this over and over again.
.NET is a Java clone with multiple language support.
1.
2. "Web Services" is not software on demand like Java applets, it's a server application that uses SOAP to talk to the client rather than DCOM or CORBA. (Reason for SOAP: Uses port 80 to get through firewalls, making server application accessible throughout internet)
3. Passport is just a lousy password authentication Web Service with additional lousy extras.
What this guys seems to be looking for is a really efficient implementation of XWindows.
"Communism is like having one [local] phone company " - Lenny Bruce
I wouldn't suggest VNC -- at least for Windows. It is just _too_slow_! I mean, it's perfectly fine for doing odd jobs. But you'd never want to use it as your main user interface!
First, don't overlook webapps. I used Squirrelmail for all my email for quite a while. It was great to be able to get all my mail (and archives) securely from ANYWHERE that had an SSL capable browser and an internet connection. PHPGroupWare is another great example. Webapps are BY FAR the most flexable from the client perspective.
Beyond this there are two more strong options.
As about fifty people have said, VNC. VNC has the advantage of working on many platforms and being able to re-direct an entire desktop. VNC "becomes" a webapp via its ability to provide your desktop via any Java capable browser. This is a strong option for your situation.
Xfree86 is a good option for serving up individual apps, and is really handy when paired with ssh (-X option). This option is better suited to a large number of fixed clients (i.e. workstations) using a small number programs (i.e. X clients (geez I hate the X terminology.)) regularly. Not so great for your situation.
Good Luck!
-Peter
Remember Workspot?
Start by getting a new one or converting your current machine to a *nix, i.e., one of the BSDs or Linux.
Second, the latest build of Mozilla for your platform, including updated JRE and JVMs.
Not 100% necessary, but you probably want a web domain / server separate from your workstation, with the appropriate security settings to make sure that what's yours stays yours, i.e., you don't get hacked. (separates the data from the programs which use it).
Once you have clean setups for all of the above, the last remaining tasks are basically developing user smarts that you will use for the life of your system: only install programs, etc. that you trust and that have a good reputation for interoperability. Maintain a good backup strategy. Keep up with security patches. All of which you should be doing anyway.
The difference is, on the *nix side, you will end up knowing how things can get mucked and prevent it or at least know how to recover.
...Open Source isn't the only answer -- but it's almost always a better value than the alternatives...
Setup VNC-server on your Widnows/Unix computer and you can user your desktop from any Java enableled webbrowser. VNC also has efficient direct clients for most popular platforms.
Unix is a better choice, as you can server can server mutiple people with desktops. Windows is limited (unless you buy Windows Terminal Server) to serving only one desktop.
VNC is slighly better than X-Windows, as X-Windows closes your apps when you disconnect. VNC will leave the open, waiting for you to return.
Trivia: A Unix server can server graphical VNC/X-Windows desktops even if the server itself doesen't even have a video card. Unix is that powerfull.
Moneyed corporations, non-working 'poor' and criminal prisoners are turning productive citizens into tax-slaves.
Yes -- at least over a local net, XFree86 is fantastic! Never tried it over the Internet, though. How well does that work out?
what happens when your server needs to be sent away for repairs for a week? How does this solve the problem?
what about an old X Terminal type setup? XDM on a highbandwidth host, and...oh, never mind
In the 60s, that's what the mind-set was like. Huge central computers with terminals everywhere so you can access your data.
Then the power came to the people and everyone wanted a decentralized, personal computer.
Now, 50 years later, we want to come back to the centralized model?
It raises the question: why did people leave the 60s model in the first place, what has changed now so people want to go back, and how long will it take to swing back to a personal model again, and what shape will it take? The fabled bio-neural implant?
Ah, I love circle theory, how everything pushed to its extreme becomes its opposite. I love it!
What I'm really talking about is changing the paradigm from an IP-centric one to a user-centric one, and I'm envisioning a good new standard for internet communications. I don't know about you, but I have quite a few discordant communications systems on my machine (and trillian can't even stay connected for long). Eventually, this kind of framework could be increased to allow more kinds of connections.
Of course, this is not that much different a vision than micro$oft has for .NET, but the key difference is that they seem to want to be the central authority, and I want to create a (open source) framework of distributed authority, where I could give a few dozen of my friends accounts on my machine running on my DSL, and then they would have a server as permanent as I want to make it. Then, whenever I go to a friend's house that has a good internet connection, I can log on and when someone sends me a quick note (or an IM or whatever distiction ends up being made), I can recieve it wherever I am.
The clinet should allow multiple users to log into it, so all the people in a room could log in, and then unlock their screen with a password (your server would also be an accessable, by you, place for your PGP key, perhaps).
Anyway, I've been thinking about this for a long time, enough ranting for me, you get the idea. ;)
Cheers, Joshua
When in danger or in doubt, run in circles, scream and shout!
What kind of man sends his computer "away for repairs" ?!?!?! Real men take it apart, order parts and fix it dammit! So, how much did they charge you for these repairs? What ever it was -- you got ripped off! I've sent my watch out for repairs. I've sent some components out for repairs. But, why in god's name would you send your entire computer out to someone else to fix?
You'll have to pay for it, but you get great performance, encrypted sessions, firewall circumvention (even if both sides are firewalled), and access from any java-enabled web browser. unfortunately you can only connect *to* windows machines (again, you can connect *from* anything)
the website is at gotomypc.com (of all places).
check out this link for more info.
I run VNC over SSH over HTTP from anywhere that has a Java VM.
MindTerm has an excellent SSH client that supports proxying SSH over HTTP (CONNECT). Then I run the Java VNC client over a tunneled socket. (I even run Win200 on VMWare on top of that mess, but the cursor gets a bit confused.)
It is a bit of a dog over the wider net, but usable. On the LAN, VNC to Linux is great, but VNC to Windows isn't.
My big box ran headless for a year, with only a VNC connection.
I recommend running everything off of network drives. Setup a very stable fileserver (that you don't ever have to ship in) and run everything off of that.
Joe
Joe Batt Solid Design
I've had good success.
Use ssh -C for heavy duty graphical apps.
Do not use it for low bandwidth stuff as it will actually slow things down.
I've run Nautilus fairly quickly over a 14KB/s connection.
- The X Window System
- Windows Terminal Services
- Citrix MetaFrame
- Tarantella Enterprise 3
- VNC
Probably the thing that would meet your needs the most is Tarantella, though it isn't cheap. It acts like a gateway, allowing applications that run on a wide variety of back end servers to display over a lightweight network protocol with a Java client.I work for a distributor of thin client and remote display software and hardware and am a Tarantella instructor. I'm also giving a presentation on all five of these systems at Rubi Con in April. Feel free to email me privately for further discussion.
Both Citrix ICA and Tarantella do this. Citrix is proven on the Windows platform and is all in all a nice program. we have had great success with it here. there are plugins and clients for Linux, Solaris, Apple, and others. Tarantella i know less about, but its server runs on multiple OS, and has clients for several as well. Both applications give you a full remote desktop over the network on local clients or web plugins. they run on a server, so you can have several users on the same server doing different things at the same time. they also scale well and have load-balancing built in (citrix does anyway). they also provice straight up remote application support. These programs are much better than VNC for a remote-desktop purpose -- VNC is bad over slow connections and handles images and screen-redraws horribly. It would be really nasty to develop anything over it. and then there is the whole problem of multiple users, and what if my connection dies and i forget to lock my desktop? its just not worth the risk.
just my $0.02. hope this helps....
Besides, VNC doesn't include encryption. You can tunnel it through a VPN or SSH or IPSEC etc, but that's it.
Don't get me wrong - I LOVE VNC - I use it at EVERY client site as a remote administration and troubleshooting tool on Windows. I've sat on the mailing list in the past. Quentin Stafford-Fraiser, Wez & co at AT&T labs and Cambridge U. do an OUTSTANDING job - but there are limitations (in MS Windows, mind you - not VNC) that make it not so great for Windows remote desktop applications. Built in encryption would be nice too.
quis custodiet ipsos custodes - Juvenal
use remote desktop, which is built in. Its the best remote desktop solution I have ever used. Its fast, responive, and it even lets you stream audio over the connection. It requires the remote desktop client, which can be installed on any windows pc (not just XP).
- WeaselGod
Eagles may soar, but weasels don't get sucked into jet turbines
Now, what you could do, if you're willing to restrict yourself to x86 machines bootable from CDrom, is make yourself a little customized BBC (help out with GAR, it rocks!) with all the apps you need, then burn a bunch of copies and carry 'em around, leave 'em at work, etc.
Unfortunately, then you're still stuck with what to do with data. But hey, P2P's the hot pick of the year, right? Get together with a bunch of friends who have constant internet access and set up a little P2P network to share your docs across a number of physically-seperated machines. You'll have to figure out something more cagey for taking care of sensitive data, but I suppose if you trust the people you're P2Ping with and encrypt using keys stored on the BBC (you could even restrict access to the P2P network based on keys), you'd probably be pretty safe.
I suppose if you're using that kind of encryption, you probably don't want to leave the BBCs all over the place like I suggested, but whatever. I digress.
I'm guessing you're looking for something a bit easier, though. :P
Al Qaeda has ninjas!
I feel like there was a company that had virtual desktops you could log into. If someone were to make a website that would store your registry settings on a backed up server, then you could log onto their domain over the internet (kind of insecure, but you'd have to know that). Anyway, it would be more secure than the typical slacker jacking into the internet with no protection at all.
I do think both are very cool, but when I'm away from my personal computer, I find stuff like phpGroupWare and TWIG to be most helpful. Basically, both are still in the useable but not yet completely polished phases of development. When phpGroupWare is done, I have fairly high hopes for it.
In addition to allowing me to keep working when I don't have my own laptop with me or it's out for repair, I find the whole idea of Web Gateways much better for real "remote" work.
XTerminals are best (IMHO) if your looking for a single server, multiple user points on a fast network. But on a slower network, or more remote, I think web gateways would be better.
I guess I'm missing why VNC is the ultimate solution here....
I don't understand the question? I have a workstation here at my desk and one in the lab. Either one gives me the exact same desktop. In fact, if I log into any workstation on the network I get the exact same desktop with access to ALL my data.
What kind of ass-backward, braindead system are you using that locks you down to one physical access point?
Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
Then use tightvnc! www.tightvnc.com
I claim this first post claim in the name of all free living AC's.
Log in and die.
The AC Advocate
Wow. At 68 posts (which took all of 5 minutes to accumulate, I might add), there are 6 recommendations for X Windows and 20 recommendations for VNC. This doesn't even take into consideration all the people who mentioned VNC but recommended Citrix or WTS instead.
Granted, VNC is a great little secret and some tight code, but from a systems standpoint, it's a hack. All it does is throw a bitmap over the wire. Meanwhile, X Windows was built from the ground up to be NETWORKED.
Just how many Slashdotters use Linux anyway?
WindowsXP already has built-in remote desktop capabilities.
Perhaps this is a bit simplistic of a suggestion compared to a few others, but it's probably something worth looking in to as an option.
-Jayde
What's a sig?
X allows for using a remote display from another machine, this has been available for years ...
ZENworks and iFolder
But they come from that beFUDdled company that everyone likes to ignore these days, even though they have hellatious solutions to real problems. Linux is great but it can't touch the features available from a platform with a mature and stable directory service. With the directory, you can pick a user and then make their environment and remake it every time they login. You can customize the environment depending on what kind of device they are logging in from or what type of connection they have. But these things wouldn't be useful would they? Just ignore these products. Wait until Microsoft releases version 3! It'll really work then!
- Hail to our fearless misleader! Fool speed ahead!
If no-one has said this before:
I would use VNC.
There's a Java-applet VNC viewer. There's even a viewer for the PalmOS! And there are servers for both Windows, which amounts to enabling you to remote-control the desktop; you can not run several such servers on the same machine, and UNIX, where each VNC-server also acts as an X-server, allowing you to run any of your normal X-apps, except any that requires hardware-accelerated 3D...
VNC allows you to disconnect your client, without taking down the VNC server, and thus your running applications, and then reconnecting from somewhere else and get back to your applications, exactly as you left them.
Also, you can easily tunle VNC through ssh, to make it secure.
--The knowledge that you are an idiot, is what distinguishes you from one.
Well, due to the lack of other informed comments, I'll say my piece.
It's quite ironic that I read slashdot now, while I'm connected through my Personable.com desktop. It gives you a free Windows 2000 desktop which you can connect to either via the Citrix client, or the M$ RDP client (java version of the previous available on their site). They charge about $30/month for access to applications like Office XP, and $1 for every 10M of storage space you use. (Of course, you could install AbiWord for free if you are smart about it.)
A rather nice service if the price doesn't bother you.
The other option is to host your own. You could install VNC on just about any machine. TightVNC does far better compression & uses less CPU power, so check it out first.
VNC on a Windows machine gives you only one remote desktop, and it is a security risk if the box doesn't have complete physical security. Under Unix, VNC works just like Terminal services. Providing as many virtual desktops as you can use.
If you consider using Windows 2000 Server with Terminal services, you need to be aware of the licensing issues. You can always log-in as an administrator and never have any issues. However I don't need to mention that that is a bad idea. If you wish to remotely log-in as a user, you can do so for ~120 days before it locks you out and wants you to get a license for the Terminal services. Registering Terminal Services is a lot like registering XP. Phone calls, or internet, but it's not something you can get around.
I hope that was useful.
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
It's a very big task. I have a lot of ideas...even reserved distantworker.com for the project...was thinking Java as the meat and potatoes of it...
Web based anything blows! (Well now that I got that out of the way) The net, and even local networks I've found to be far more unreliable than a local machine. I think you'd find the downtime because of any number of network, server, internet or ISP failures to be far more problematic than a single machine failure.
Just have a plan for a fast recovery (I.e. actually BACKUP you data frequently) should there actually be a catestrophic failure of your local machine.
Getting to your mail or data is sort of nice as a secondary interface, but with all the security problems involved, and it's general flakiness/slowness all around in accessing your programs or data over even a LOCAL network, I've never understood the want.
Contrary to popular belief, coding is not all free blow-jobs and beer. Those things cost MONEY!
I don't know of an immediately available solution to your situation, but I am working on an application framework that will allow developers to create products that meet your needs. The framework is called Echo, and it licensed under the GNU LGPL license. It's written entirely in Java, and runs in any Java Servlet container (v2.2 or higher). It enables a developer to create Web-based applications using a component/event-driven methodology and an API similar to Swing.
Echo takes care of all HTML/JavaScript rendering and HTTP request handling for the developer. It currently supports Mozilla or IE 5.x+ browsers (it does not require any plug-ins or client-side Java). Its built-in capabilities are limited to those that a JavaScript-enabled browser can provide, but it is built to be extended, such that it is possible to create components that will embed complex DHTML/JavaScript-based or Applet-based widgets within an application.
Echo is under development, with a stable release targeted in a month or two. The project is hosted at sourceforge.net at http://sourceforge.net/projects/echo, if you want the latest info, feel free to join the mailing list. Tutorials and a white paper are available at http://www.nextapp.com/products/echo
From what I understand talking to a friend, there are basically a few ways of doing remote desktops.
Screenshots
This method includes scraping the screen, compressing the bitmap and transferring it across the pipe. (I believe VNC uses this method)
Intercepting Graphics Libraries
This method requires the software intercept calls to the operating system's graphics libraries. Rather than capturing large bitmaps, this method aims to be more efficient by capturing the basic drawing instructions themselves. I believe Citrix uses this method, I could be wrong.
Widgets
Rather than capturing screens or graphics instructions, this method standardizes basic user interface components and thier respective events.
When the user click on a button, it sends a message to the server telling it you clicked the button. The server may send the client messages, telling it to hide the button, or give a textbox a new value.
From what I understand, this is how X-Windows works.
Question 1: What sort of method is this guy looking for?
Question 2: What method(s) should *WE* be working on?
Question 3: Does anybody have any other methods they would like to share?
"Communism is like having one [local] phone company " - Lenny Bruce
I find ssh works great. pine for mail, and whatever browser is on the local workstation is fine.
What the heck else would you need?
Another good option, using entire free (both as in speech and as in beer) software, is VNC, tunneled through SSH, tunneled through GNU HTTP tunnel.
Although I've used straigh X forwarding, I generally prefer VNC because of the ability to kill the connection (either intentionally or not) and reconnect later to the same session.
** The opinions expressed here are my own, and do not reflect those of my employers - past, present, or future**
The whole concept behind VNC is a FrameBuffer. Would you like to copy entire bitmaps over from one computer to another without any notion of optimization?
If you're using Windows apps, you'd be better off using Citrix or Terminal Services, as they push over API calls instead of raw bitmap data, making the GUI a lot snappier.
...does Microsoft board members get to "Ask Slashdot"?
lol.... IDE's
Get your Unix fortune now!
I personally can't stand Terminal Server due to the way it handles processes. Since you aren't actually 'taking over' the machine, but instead using a sub-process, there are many things you cannot do.
For example, if IIS needs access to a database (Sybase, in my case), it will not give up control so that your Terminal Server connection can use it (if you needed to connect to it directly). Therefore you cannot access that database unless you kill it at the 'console' level. Aside from the myriad of other problems I had, this was one total show-stopper for me.
VNC is free (as in beer) and actually really fine software. I prefer it instead.
We are working not only on a way for you to access files and applications remotely, but on a whole operating system around the concept. Whats even cooler is that you do not NEED to be running a windows machine to use our remote apps, a linux box, mac, PS2, or even a set-top device could connect and they all get the exact same interface and functionality. I would lOVE to hear comments. Check out our pre-release website. Mostly you just get a screen shot: http://66.24.102.29
Hey give the guy a break. Those "cup holders" are hard to repair by yourself...
I've thought about this as I tend to be an itenerant tech worker and often wish I had a file/email/contact I left on a machine somewhere else.
So what I want is 'all my data centrally stored, in a place I trust, that I can access from whatever browser I happen to be at'.
The hard part is 'a place I trust'. If I had one, arranging for my apps to write to it - native formats or XML or something, and arranging to read from it later would follow.
There are enough browser plug-ins for desktop apps that this would be workable.
I'm not aware of any ISP building around this - 'here's 20 Gig of space, look we've collected all the plug-ins you could want for Excel/Palm desktop/etc... and you can trust us even more than your Mom and we can prove it', but if you're interested and I'm interested, maybe there's a business here.
It's still difficult to beat the good ol' Unix shell. I do virtually all of my Internet-type things (email, irc, Usenet) etc. and can do development things (compiler on the server, decent editors like Vim and Emacs) using nothing more than an ssh client. I can do it from wherever I am. I just keep a copy of PuTTY on a floppy (or download the exe) and go, wherever I am at.
If I *really* need a GUI, I can use xvnc or simply use X forwarding with SSH. If I need X under MS Windows, I use cygwin to provide the X server, or alternately, just use the VNC client and xvnc on the server.
Oolite: Elite-like game. For Mac, Linux and Windows
You are just using the wrong version of Windows.
It cracks me up to see people continually trying to force MS Windows to do things that Unix has been able to do with NO ADDITIONAL SOFTWARE for YEARS.
Face it people, MS doesn't get it and NEVER will. You just keep banging your head into a brick wall.
To solve your problem, you have to change your mindset. Think outside the box - the Microsoft box that is. Run everything possible in a UNIX environment, only using Windows for the last couple remaining proprietary apps that tie you to Windows (second machine, VMWare, or whatever.)
There probably is a decent solution out there for remote-control of a desktop, but X-windows ain't it.
"I don't know that atheists should be considered citizens, nor should they be considered patriots." - George Bush
We actually have a pretty nice remote PC setup here at where I work.
The way it is setup is that the company standarized ALL of its PCs and laptops. So first off, everyone has the exact same "workstation", same processor, same RAM, hardware, etc. Then we have the exact same basic software installed on every single machine (MS Windows, Office, Anti-virus, etc.) Therefore, when we download or connect to our workstation accounts, we don't have to download the application software as well. Everyone's personal account files (work related files, email, etc.) then reside not on the PC in their office, but on a remote drive than can be accessed anywhere in the company's network - worldwide. The way its set up now is that I can leave my Michigan office, fly down to Texas, go to a company PC there, log in with my user ID and password, and bring up all of my email and working documents and work there. When I'm done, I save everything, shut it down, and then I can access it again at another PC somewhere else. We have people here to access their files from around the world, as they travel to all of the company's locations across the world.
Unfortunately, I can't comment on the server software we use that allows all of this, as I'm merely a user of the sytem, rather than an administrator. However, in the time I've been using it, it works VERY well, preventing downtime if your PC in your office goes down.
Now the system does have its problems. If the server which handles your personal account is down, you can't access any of your files or email. If a network connection is down or slow, same problem. I usually make backups of very important files on my office PC so that if the network crashes, I can still work.
Now that I've described what we have, it makes me think that what I've described is more of a LAN or company-wide network accessable system, rather than internet based, accessable by any dial-up or other connection. However, it does work, allowing all of us here to use just about any computer anywhere on the company network.
-When going for broke, go for Ithaca!
The Windows API - embodied in Win32 - simply has troubles if you "remote" it.
I hate to voice an unpopular opinion on Slashdot but my personal experience has been very different.
I have a desktop machine, a laptop and a home computer. I have been using Remote Desktop (Microsoft Terminal Services Client) very regularly for about 8-10 months now. I use it to connect to my desktop when I'm at meetings (for demos, to start off or check on the status of a job, use software I don't have on my laptop, etc) as well as from home (after VPNing in to the Corporate network). I've also used it to connect to my home computer from work (when I've left it VPNed in)
Maybe I'm not hitting the corner cases or demanding enough of it but I have yet to experience a single problem with Terminal Services. I can't think of a single task for which Terminal Services has not sufficed and in several instances the performance (window rendering, etc.) was a lot better than I had experienced over similar bandwidth connections with X11.
Of course, I've not had to worry about EULAs licensing issues, etc. since my company has a site license for all the software I use.
YMMV.
Mmmm.. Donuts
You don't need a 'no machine' solution, you need a machine small enough to carry with you everywhere and a storage unit small and cheap enough for you to carry backups with you. That way you can always have a machine, and always have all your data.
Laptops are close, but you still need better high density storage.
How can you setup tight vnc to give you a login prompt (so it functions more like NT Terminal Server) via xdm.. It sounds like a pain to have every user start their own vncserver, remember which screen its on..
There is/was a company that was offering remote Linux desktop connectivity. From their site it looks like they might be dead. They solved a problem similar to what you are talking about. Allowing remote desktop connectivity via browser's with Java support and vnc. Their, defunct looking website is at http://www.workspot.com/ and there was /. coverage http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=00/03/26/172320 2&mode=thread
I have dreamed of this for years. I have found that the network Independence of X11 to be a HUGE advantage here but this alone does not go far enough. The core problem is where the state of the application is stored (between sessions). Most applications store this on the local filesystem. Therefore, you can go a long way to solving this problem by configuring NFS (in conjunction with NIS) to mount your user file system from a central NFS server and the problem is solved.
What would be really nice to see, is this information stored on an LDAP server so that my "preferences" could follow me around. Unfortunately, it would seem that MS is closer to this dream than Unix (most windows apps use the registry to store this information, I just don't know of any applications that will use a remote machines registry to pull the users preferences).
I have been able to make this a reality to a limited degree by:
1) Pointing all of my potential client machines to the same font server.
2) Storing all of my Address book information on the same LDAP server.
3) Using a file share that supports FTP,NFS, & SMB to store all of my files.
4) One nice thing is that Mozilla can (or at least used to) be hackable so that bookmarks are stored on a remote LDAP server. This is a good step in the right direction.
There are many providers that offer this kind of service.
A server is always far more stable than a desktop pc. So it's a good idea to host your applications and data in a remote server with the proper power supply, backup and security available. This gives you better uptime. Of course you will depend on your ISP to access this server.
If you use this method, then you access a multiuser environment that prorates the expense of a server.
On UNIX servers you can always use X or any product like Tarantella to share applications and connect from different clients.
On Windows servers you can use Citrix or Terminal Services to share apps and then use the Citrix client from any platform to connect to the server. I've used a Wyse Winterm to connect to a Citrix server and works very well. It's also very fast even through dial-up connections.
I recommend this kind of multiuser environment. And there are many companies out there that offer the service to companies or home users.
Appart from this multiuser environment, if you only want to connect to your remote desktop PC then you can use something like VNC, PCAnywhere or Timbuktu. But this method won't work if your remote PC goes down. Also this method is not really multiuser.
Microsoft is looking for a steady revenue stream, but there are some points you need to address that I think you're ignoring.
.NET as Jxta (Sun's Peer-to-Peer software) is integrated with Java. Translation: They're not even integrated. You could make you're own passport clone with Perl and Apache if you chose to do so.
1. Microsoft is already implementing licensing schemes, "coercing" people to upgrade.
2. Microsoft would rather have software check registration keys each time it's used via Internet, than remotely hosting software. (IT'S MUCH CHEAPER THAN HOSTING, AND LESS RISKY)
3. Passport hasn't been successful. It's a way for you to log into all your favorite websites with your hotmail account, but it requires that websites take advantage of it. It's not unique, because any website with a competitant programmer could implement thier own Passport.
4. Passport is as integrated with
"Communism is like having one [local] phone company " - Lenny Bruce
VNC, WindowsXP Remote Desktop and PC Anywhere. These programs allow you to control your actual desktop remotely, as if you we're actually there in front of it. Unfortunately the way this works is by streaming image data over the wire, this can be very slow, like when browsing the web a good deal of the data is images. For something like editing text (e.g. Word-processing) some of the programs are smart enough to just send text data, so the response time is acceptable; even over slow connections.
WindowsXP Remote Desktop is the best I've used so far, it seems to be very efficient and even allows you do 'share' your hard drives for easy copying of files, copy&paste of text works flawlessly and it also streams music that's playing on your machine.
Unfortunately VNC's and the like do not work for games, streaming video or any graphically intense application. They only work well with a broadband or LAN connection, while they will work over a slower pipe, it can be quite a painful experience.
Telnet, ssh: command line computing. Many people at slashdot will testify by it, and to be sure; once you mastered the tools they can be just as useful as their graphical counterparts. VI, gcc, and mutt can be just as productive as Word, Visual Studio and Outlook, it just takes some getting used to. However the tools can be limiting, you can't work with MSWord documents in VI, and you can't compile Win32 apps in gcc, so it depends greatly in the context of your work.
The main advantage to command line apps are there very low bandwidth requirements and portability. Machines from the 80's can support a telnet connection over a 300baud modem, so you have no need for a modern windows machine to connect to home. For some, this is more important then being able to use GUI based apps.
Web based, Client/Server. Back in the .com boom their we're some companies that we attempting to create full blown office productivity apps in HTML, and they worked pretty well. A Solid example is yahoo.com. They offer free (centralized) email w/ spell checking, notes, calendar and other stuff all from your web browser. Web apps are not as powerful as client side applications, but they are improving rapidly and will probably be better tomorrow, this is also where Microsoft and others are heading. Hailstorm (correct me if I'm wrong) is Microsoft's attempt to mix a client side application that connects to server side 'web services' to access your data. This may be exactly what your looking for, but it's not out yet.
.NET), but imagine I will within the next year or two.
I work away from my computer all the time, I use yahoo.com's email because I don't trust other domains to stay around, and I need my email if my home computer isn't working. I use WindowsXP remote desktop for when I need to do something on my desktop, and I use ssh for when I want to mess around with my linux box at home or edit my sourceforge project page. They're all good solutions but are better suited for different tasks. I haven't used anything 'webservice' like yet (except messing around with
-Jon
this is my sig.
Is there some way that he could maintain two (Say) remote desktops in such a way that if one failed, the other would pick up more-or-less seamlessly for the other?
I think something like this exsists for web servers, so maybe that solution could be adapted to VNC/Xfree/Citrix/whatever serving?
I mean, if he just goes with (insert remote client/server here), he's just as far up the creek if the server machine dies as he is now if his desktop dies, right?
The Deathstar mainframe is THE best home computer in the world!
Once .NET-like technologies become pervasive and everyone relies on the 'net for all of their computing, we'll be seeing things like this:
"It became clear to me (when my ISP was down for a week due to a DoS attack) that it's high time to finally divorce myself from an insecure, nebulous collection of anonymous machines and applications by using data and software accessible by a self-contained system as much as possible. I'm talking Visual IDEs, productivity apps, powerful, easy to use email client, etc, all presented to me consistently on a single, local desktop, as if I owned the software for my exclusive use! Is anyone seriously trying this? What are the best practices and best applications? What are the biggest shortcomings? Are there good web sites devoted to this noble goal?"
None of these solutions discussed (i.e. remote desktops, thin clients, etc.) would have prevented the situation frenchgates presents, if the computer that needed to be fixed for a week were the one with the critical data on it (i.e. the one serving the remote access). Hot pluggable RAID mirrors would. So would any other good backup option. Eventually I am sure there will be good alternate solutions, and VNC is a great piece of software, but it is for convenience and portability, not for divorcing oneself from the need to access any particular computer, as is mentioned! Back up your data/apps and take them with you.
Use Terminal Server and definitely load the Terminal Server Advanced Client - you can access it from any Win32 machine running IE 5+ where the internet security allows running Active X controls. (You gotta set up something called 'tsweb')
Some limitations are cutting and pasting to the local machine, and printing to the local printer, but otherwise it's definitely worth a look.
I would post a link to our terminal server web client (TSWEB) site, but what would I say when my PHB asks 'why is the internet not working?'
:)
MeepMeep
As you've probably guessed VNC et al will only give you remote access, not exactly what you are looking for.
For most mundane things I use Yahoo, it gives me email, address, calendar, bookmarks, yellow pages, file space etc etc I can log in from wherever, currently San Francisco, but also the UK etc. Simple and cheap. The best thing is that all my bookmarks are there for me.
There used to be a company called desktop.com which I thought was going great places, until the slimey VCs fucked up and took their money back. This would have been exactly what you wanted.
You could take a look at freedesk, Magical Desk.
When you find what you like prehaps you could do a review?
It really depends on the app. I work all day long with emacs over the net (ckient is 2000 miles from server) and it is quite quick but real widget enabled X apps can be very slow.
Ingredients:
.NET server will have true multi-user capability and licensing as Windows 2000 Server does now. Even so, Microsoft Terminal Service solutions, require a great deal more bandwidth than the Citrix ones do and there are clients for Win32 ONLY!
Citrix Nfuse
Citrix Metaframe
Microsoft Windows 2000 Server & Terminal services.
It's a high upfront cost but, it *is* the *best* solution. Citrix Nfuse is an add-on that allows you to access your applications over the internet, through a web browser. Citrix Metframe allows you to serve a desktop or individual applications over a wide range of protocols and topologies. Windows 2000 Server Terminal Services offers the core multi-user environment that all this works on. With this combination you can have access to any and all of your individual applications or the entire desktop, from *any* client. Citrix has clients for DOS, Win32, Mac, Unix, Java, and even a web browser.
Using this configuration, you can have performance VERY near to the performance and responsiveness of actually being at the console of a workstation. It will, on average, only require 20Kbps of bandwidth so, you can even use it transparently over dial-up. If you need *nix access, you simply need to use an Xclient, such as Hummingbird's Xceed on the Metaframe server. This gives you terminal access as well as the ability to run X-Windows applications.
Many people here are recommending VNC (a good product) or Windows XP. VNC is not the answer to your question because VNC is simply remotely controlling a workstation if used on a Windows box. It is multi-user on Unix but it requires more bandwidth and is not nearly as stable and reliable as the Metframe solution. Furthermore, using VNC on a Unix box eliminates the use of Windows applications, unless you can get them running under Wine. Windows XP is probably the worst solution because, although it does have Terminal Services built in, this service is limited to one or two users, as it is only intended for remote diagnostics and repair. It is not intended to be for multi-user use and it cannot be licensed for multi-user use. The "yet to be released"
Tarantella has also benn mentioned as a solution. This is *not* a bad choice. However, Tarantella is not as mature or robust as Metaframe is. This means that there are likely to be problems using Tarantella that have already been solved by Citrix. Client options, is the first that comes to mind.
So, in the end the Citrix Metaframe solution is the best of all worlds. Like I said, it isn't cheap but, damn, it's the best thing since sliced bread!
Are there *any* coherent directions to allow viewing of the java VNC desktop through https? I've tried making the applet directory an SSL-enabled virtual host in apache, but that doesn't seem to work. Any help would be appreciated.
Here's the big list of links of a lot of VNC derivatives in case anyone's wondering where all these contribs suddeny appeared from (like me ;-) )
A caveman dreams of being us, the incalculable power and riches. We dream of being Q, then what?
"It would seem to us as though the whole world were a user interface."
So AT&T is building the MATRIX?
I don't know why, but I get the idea that VNC is not what this person is after.
After reading through what they had to say I thought they were asking more about what MS want to try to do, that being able to run software from your home PC which is maintained on their servers.
You buy a licence to use their software, which you access only via broadband, and the software never touches your computer.
VNC, I think, is an incorrect answer to the question, because that still means your using your computer for stuff, but connecting through sonmeone elses. Not using your computer to connect to someone elses to use their stuff, which is what I thought the original item was about.
All I can remember though is that MS was attempting to come up with some strategy to do this, where you use software on their servers from your computer, but I have no idea where I read it.
I solve this problem with emacs. Runs on Win32, Unix, VMS. Runs under telnet or in full graphical glory. Consistent editing interface between my email, usenet, editing code, writing documentation, and IRC. You can even use the same emacs from multiple locations if you need to! Now. I use the local web browser wherever.
And I'm not sure how you're ever going to get around the fact that you need a central data repository, but maybe you should buy a rock solid piece of hardware for that. That's how I do it and it works out nicely.
What platforms is Terminal Server available for? Can I run a client on my Palm?
Does it truly satisfy the "accessible from any internet connected computer" requirement?
VNC server and client are available for just about anything.
My amazing wife - Artist, Author, Philosopher - Laurie M
I run a VNC session over a zebedee tunnel to my home RedHat box while at work. Every document I create is thusly already at home. It was a bit awkward at first trying to cope with the lag of the interface, but in time you get used to it. After a while of this, I even threw down on some PERL scripts to nightly ftp my documents from my linux box to my wife's XP machine, because 'hey, you never know. Shit happens'. In this way I always use the same desktop and all my files on hand. Even when I go to the parental units houses, I can just jump right in and grab files (SFTP), or check something for them (What's that address?). At work they've given me a XP laptop to do my stuff, but all I use it for launching my terminal, and playing BB King and Charles Mingus all damn day.
Store everything you need on one of these pocket drives. Including your OS and Home folders. This way you'll have everything you need in your pocket....
You can just boot of the drive and voilà your desktop!
Better yet buy the new 10 GB iPod and you can hop Macs like nobody's business!!!
What I think this person is really aiming at is something that is being actively pursued in the research arena in colleges all over the US. For example, Carnegie Mellon together with Intel is pursuing a project called Internet Suspend and Resume. To quote:
Years ago, at a JavaOne, Sun bragged about their "webtop", which was based upon their iPlanet software. It sounded like a dream come true: all Sun employees had little authentication devices for coming up with their keys; they could fire up any Java enabled browser, bang in their keys, and access all their email, newsgroups, web pages (including publishing) and so forth anywhere that an internet connection was available.
:-), which can be access from any Java-enabled browser (or more efficiently, using the VNC client application, which is open source, and heavily ported).
.NET) will be the future of the internet. The Linux/Open Source community needs to be careful to make sure it isn't .NET services that dominant this, and that there are other alternatives that meet the same needs as well, or preferrably better. (Or if .NET does dominate, the government or the business community makes sure that the protocols are open.)
I thought it was terribly exciting. But I haven't much from it since, so I'm guessing it was yet another big hype job from Sun, with little to support it.
I tried out the iPlanet demo a few months later, but it was horribly confusing and complicated to set up, and I never was able to actually get it running. Not exactly ready for prime time. (It was an acquisition, I believe, that was never properly integrated and deployed in a slick package.) Recently, I think Sun has made some rumblings about iPlanet, so maybe it will be resurrected in a more usable fashion.
The idea of divorcing oneself from a specific piece of hardware for their desktop is going to be the future. If you think about it, the popularity of HotMail and other web-based mail services is very much a specific case of this for email. By making the application web-centric, you free yourself from specific hardware.
One step in the right direction for non-web email is using IMAPI instead of POP. I made the switch awhile ago, and am feeling much more "mobile" with the mail stored on a central server, especially given that a large chunk of my work revolves around email. Any machine running Windows or Linux has a browser or mail client that support MAPI, and I can get at all my messages.
The biggest problem with this is that other than email and browsing (which is inherently portable), few applications have been made to work in such a distributed fashion. Also, even when an application has been done in such a manner, the ubiquity of connectivity is an issue. If you're away from the home or office, or on a plane, or elsewhere, live connectivity can be a problem. This issue will be reduced with time, as airlines add internet connectivity, CDPD and other wide area connectivity becomes more prevalent.
But the apps are still an issue.
For those who haven't checked it out, VNC deserves a good look. You can create a virtual desktop on Windows (or more importantly, Linux
In a slightly more archaic fashion, the textual VNC equivalent, "screen" (standard in RedHat and other Linux distributions) is a powerful and oft-overlooked utility, which I consider essential for anyone using a command line. Disappearing windows or disconnected telnet sessions become irrelevant with screen, which also allows shared sessions, history, and other amazing stuff.
Regarding VNC, the performance isn't as good as PC Anywhere, but it's usable with 28.8K+, in my experience. There's nothing like going to your hotel, and firing up an X session that is actually running at your house.
I firmly believe the "webtop" or it's equivalent (please God, not
-me
Love many, trust a few, do harm to none.
as for encrpytion
tunnel it through ssh.
I'm a big retard who forgot to log out of Slashdot on Mike's computer! LOOK AT ME.
Java word processors do exist, and they aren't bad really.
I've used two at different times (one was.. "Freedom to something" I don't really recall the name. A quick google search did not turn it up, but trust me.. it at least existed at one point.
This is really not only applicable to this guy, but everyone in the Linux community. These Java word processors are really applicable to the Linux environment.. and in that respect really deserve to be looked at.
Turn s60 photos into awesome videos with mScrapbook for all S60 3rd edition phones!
If you've got a Linux machine somewhere, you could do what I do. Install screen on the machine. In your .profile, test whether it's begin run on an ssh connection not in screen, and if so, do: screen -x -S home || screen -R -S home || bash and then exit
This won't take care of graphics, but it means that you'll have the exact session always running wherever you go. If you put a webserver which serves a MindTerm SSH client on the machine, you can go to the URL and continue working from any java-enabled browser.
If you want to use applications that not everyone has, you're going to have to store or run at least some programs on the server. Running them there generally makes the most sense, since that's where your data is, although if they fetch information for immediate display from third parties, doing that from the machine you're sitting at makes sense.
So what you really want is a widget toolkit where the communication between the program and the widgets is light enough to have over a network, that you're likely to have available on any machine use want to use. I don't think there is such a thing so far with more capabilities than a color xterm, unfortunately.
The guy at changemypage.com is working on some cool ideas.
Here is some additional VNC-related software that you may find useful. It comes from a project at Wyse a couple of years ago.
vncd spawns VNC X-windows sessions for incoming connections. It can be run from inetd or by itself. This is handy if you to deploy a bunch of thin clients around a Linux system. It also has a little protocol for negotiating things like display geometry and color depth. If you just sent "DONE" following a line feed to it, it will then start the VNC protocol. See the source code for commands for setting display geometry, color scheme and environment variables in the session.
remote-audio is a client and server for having audio programs send their output to a remote client. On the Linux machine that you are logged into, it intercepts the open() symbol in the C library to catch attempts to open thevnc-3.3.3.patch is source code for some VNC optimizations, such as local cursor, gzip compression of the link, special encoding for 1x1 rectangles (which, if I recall correctly, were nearly 50% of rectangles in some tests).
Wyse also shipped a "regular" X server that ran on an X terminal that could also accept incoming VNC connections to allow remote operation of that terminal. I believe the product was called WT5000. I started working on putting this into XFree86-4.2 and I've put a source snapshot here, but I have no idea if it works (it adds a "-vnc" argument to the X command line to allow incoming VNC connections).
For example, if IIS needs access to a database (Sybase, in my case), it will not give up control so that your Terminal Server connection can use it (if you needed to connect to it directly).
Are you seriously, or trolling?
I've used terminal services now for the last 2 years, running sessions to a web server, and a development server from home, over a VPN I have never had any issues with it (apeart from trying to install SQL server 7 over it)
I ALWAYS have a copy of SQL enterprise manager open, as well as SQL QA (both using direct connections to the database), as well as my development IDE tools....
With Citrix MetaFrame, remote administrators can only see and control items within a user's Citrix session.
Things like the ICA Client configuration, printer drivers, and operating system settings, reside on the client PC. They cannot be manipulated remotely.
At least when I was working desktop support, I could get users to move out of my why while I fixed their problem. Dealing with Citrix users across the state, I am now dependent on them to be my "eyes" while trying to troubleshoot their problem.
Instructing users to check their settings, or even find the name of their printer driver, over the phone can be a very painful process.
Me: "OK, what operating system are you using?"
User: "I don't know."
Me: "Is your printer connected to your PC, or is it a network printer?"
User: "I don't know."
Even worse is that users -- and our brilliant help desk -- cannot distinguish between "Citrix" and "PeopleSoft," which is the only applicatioin we use Citrix for. Any problems with PeopleSoft, or its related databases, are routinely forwarded to the Citrix MetaFrame admins. We waste a lot of time routing calls to the proper people, which is what our help desk should be doing.
The same applies if the problem is with their local computer, because the users' desktop support people usually don't want, or know how, to do their jobs.
I don't know if Citrix Metaframe meets the orignal author's requirements for a remote desktop, but it certainly does not meet mine.
I am sure nothing like this exists yet, but in answer to some of the comments about the problems that can occur if you still have a centralized system you connect to via a client, I wonder if FreeNet(or something like it) could be used to some degree in a situation like this. Programs and data could be stored all over the network like data is on FreeNet. Although, I am sure running a program from a system like this could get interesting. But I think that a distributed approach to this could be the way to go than trying to have a centralized set of servers. I could also be better for privacy. Just an interesting(IMHO) idea to ponder.
If you run Linux, you can use X to do this. ANY internet connected machine that has an X server on it will work (these are avaliable for Windows, Macintosh, Linux, Unix, just about every major OS) to connect to it, and I have had good success using my home system (on a cable modem with a relatively slow upload cap) from an iMac or Win95 box from my CONGESTED high school network. Although I have never used a Java X server, I have heard that there is one avaliable (WeirdMind or something?) but I dont know how well it works. I successfully used KDE over this connection, and had very few problems (it was a bit slow to actually draw the windows, but seemed to speed up quite a bit once the window was open. For this reason I turned off features such as autohide taskbar) I was using my usual NIDE (Non Integrated Develpment Environment) of xterm and kwrite. Before I used this system, I was using SSH to do all my work, and didnt find that it took any more time. I found a great java SSH client that has built in SCP and tunneling called MindTerm. I tunneled my X connection through this as well.
/usr/games/fortune
Keep in mind that VNC server running on Unix/X-Windows is much faster and more efficent than VNC server on Windows. X-Widnows makes is easy for VNC server to figure out what's going on with the desktop - but the Win32 API is a bitch to figure out and VNC Server on Windows sometimes has to bruteforce screen checks by sampeling pixels in the buffer.
A Unix VNC server is very usable over a modem connection, but Windows VNC server isen't.
It's this reason, than all the Citrix/Windows Terminal Server people don't like VNC - they havent seen VNC on Unix.
Moneyed corporations, non-working 'poor' and criminal prisoners are turning productive citizens into tax-slaves.
The closest i have gotten to remote desktop on the win platform is XPs terminal server thing, which is called just "remote desktop". That pretty much rocks for me - BUT , im not sure it would be any faster than VNC (which was slow for me) over the internet.. Might be but ive felt that whatever ive tried its too slow for much use unless im using it over my Local Area Network.. But for my use XP TS rocks on the LAN. Perfectly adequate there.(Im running on 100mbit, dunno how it works on less.) When i want to relax i go to the laptop and control two other machines from that =) Pretty cool.
According to Microsoft Business Licensing(who I just talked to this morning on this issue), you can't access a Windows XP running any Microsoft application unless you have a vaild license for the OS and every app you intend to access. If you want to dial Remote Desktop Connection in and use Access 2002, the machine you're connectiing from must have Windows XP and Access 2002. This mostly defeats the purpose. We (a very large government contractor) ran various scenarios in regards to types of devices, other operating systems, definitions of "use" and so forth. All the information about this is contained in their Product Use Rights on page 2. Microsoft's recommendation was that you are allowed to install any product, except the OS, on a "secondary portable device" using the same license as long as the primary user is the same. So, just buy a laptop and be done with it...
Get a yahoo mail account. Yahoo briefcase for file storage. A yahoo calendar. Geocities(yahoo) website. Yahoo text editor, hopefully soon replaced by a real word processor, and an online finance program.
I used yahoo because I didn't want to use the word Microsoft in my post, but either provides all of these services...
Certainly every man at his best state is but vapor
Apple's newly released Remote Desktop [apple.com] allows remote access from any OS X box from any Mac OS >8.6 (i think). In addition it has a slew of remote administration features to boot. Like other posters have said though, this won't get around your requirement of extreme availability (there is still a single point of failure).
Here's the faq - I think it's generally what you're looking for. The developer's documentation (for developers who want to make software that works with the OS) is terribly out of date. So I'm not posting it.
I've always wanted to post this to the slashdot folks, but I had intended to wait until I at least had the developer release out - unfortunately, this article posed exactly the question that I've been trying to answer...So here I am vapor-ing my own product. Sigh.
have some hosting company somewhere with a big ass mainframe rent you a virtual server on thier machine. they should already be taking backup precations on thier system so they can hold your data and fall over to another machine if that one fails.
Then, using Linux, setup an X environment that you can log into from any browser using wiredx server--it serves X through a java applet. -- if you NEED windows, install VMware on your virtual server, and install windows on that.
Of course, renting a virtual server will likely cost you a few hundred dollars a month at LEAST. if you get charged for bandwidth, it might get REAL EXPENSIVE.
"The Most Fun Possible on 4 wheels" is at SunBuggy in Las Vegas
You'll get cooler apps than java or anything on windows. Plus it's cheaper and it's the best remote desktop you'll ever find.
To run it on windows or linux, it is a single binary. Both fit on a floppy, and do not need to be installed. I confuse the heck out of people when I go into a windows computer lab, and my machine is "running" linux.
-- the computer doesn't want any beer, no matter how much you think it does. NEVER, EVER feed your computer beer.
I do the same things all the time. I use visual IDE's for programming just like every one else. But I don't see the need to make a graphical connection to remote machines when I'm trying to sync text files!(i.e. any code)
//$windowsmachine/ C$ //$unixmachine/$mountpoint for each Windows machine you want to connect to remotely. Install CVS and SSH clients on your remote machines. Use the same IDEs and other software on your laptop as you do on your remotes. Log in using SSH and use CVS or some other method to sync files.
Have a Samba server everywhere you have a Windows machine, and do mount -t smbfs -o username=$user,password=$passwd
This is easy and works everywhere. I've got setups at work, school and several friends houses that I can access from anywhere I'm at. If you need to control Windows machines remotely, learn its command line. You'll make up the time you spend learning it with the time you'll save dealing with slow buggy graphical clients.
I've never run into any shortcomings dealing with remote machines using text based clients. Perhaps there is someone out there who can enlighten me as to what I'm missing, but as far as I'm concerned text-based is faster and more productive.
No, Thursday's out. How about never - is never good for you?
With cvs you will have access to your documents from anywhere. With imap you will have access to your email from anywhere. cvs and imap are supported by most platforms and many mail clients.
I used to work at Sun, and that's precisely the approach they use for the corporate WAN. It's partly about being able to access your data from anywhere, but it's mainly about the difficult of backing up data that isn't on servers. (Though that always struck me as kind of strange, since Sun sells backup applications that catch workstation data.) Such a setup has obvious advantages, but there were glitches:
You mean like having file servers that can roll over based on a few config files, profiles that work on multiple desktops, and a consistent interface across multiple machines based on only a few files?
Yup, did that today with a handful of unix boxen.
Daily backups.
He wants to be able to store all his work on the internet somewhere and be able to access it and work on it *anywhere*.
Anywhere pretty much means a Windows PC. When was the last time you walked past an internet cafe where you could use a Linux/Unix box?
would it be nice if vnc did the tunneling for you?
What kind of fruitcake "sends their machine off for a week" for "repairs".. What -- did it need it's oil changed?
Don't all serious computer users roll their own when it comes to hardware?
Oh, you probably bought a $4,000 Dell (which is a $700 machine and $3,300 of talk).
God some people are idiots.
Slashdot is a piece of shit too -- I laugh at this site every day.. The articles are jokes, the reviews are crazy and the whole "Open Source is the only good in the world everything else is evil" attitude KILLS ME. You all are fruitcakes. Not the good Christmas fruitcake, that fruitcake in the back of the car for 3 years flavor.
Of courseI do come here, so I guess you guys won!
Not to mention that's its frustrating that is doesn't include an FTP server integrated... I understand why, it's listed on their site but keep in mind this is something that you also need to setup and administer
Windows boxes are everywhere. His main requirement is that he will be able to do his work anywhere. Windows boxes fulfil that requirement. If his solution works on Apple or Linux boxes, great. If it doesn't - no big deal.
I've been doing this for about a year now and it works very well for me. Windows terminal server. (I use 2k advanced server in remote admin mode. This limits the number of connections to two) Rdesktop for connectivity from my Linux desktop. http://www.rdesktop.org I'v tryed most of the other options out there including VNC. The big advantage to this one is the responce time. It's fast, very fast.
Ok there are several ways of doing this on a windows network or even a non windows network. Samba or a NT server, it doesn't matter.
For the most basic way to get your profile across a network, just change your user account's profile to point to some network share. Now anytime you log in, your desktop, screen settings, ect will be accessable as long as your programs are installed on the network too.
Samba does sorta make this easier, with the whole $HOME directory analogy.
It's that easy, none of this VNC crap. If you wanted to switch enviroments from windows to *nix you could telnet into a *nix machine, you could use reflectionX to get a remote X display on your windows machine. Best yet you could use a *nix machine to connect to a *nix machine because that would be so l33t0 kR4d D00D.
It doesn't need to be overengineered, just go to your user manager and set the profile path.
You can't beat it for how easy it is to get into from any Web browser. It's replaced a lot of my desktop functionality....
The problem is ... there's no money in it. Micro$oft can't figure out how to do it either, or they would be already there ... this is more than a remote desktop question ... what happens when your desktop is in the shop? Applixware tried and failed. There just isn't a market yet. btw - It would be very easy to put OEOne's (http://www.oeone.com) product up in that fashion, but my guess is it would not fly either.
This is where Microsoft comes in. They have a semi trusted brand (to Jo Sixpack anyway), and enough developers running 'microsoft based solutions' to pull it off.
.NET. Even though they do force it with other products (MSN Messenger), it's integration will be limited to Internet services.
I agree with everything you've said. The original poster seemed to imply that Microsoft would, by default, have a monopoly in authentication services.
Microsoft *has* gained monopolies in different technology sectors, but they've accompilished this in the past by either bundling it with the OS, pushing it via OEM channels, or provided *some* superior experience by integrating it with another product. However, this doesn't gaurantee success, especially if the technology has very little value to people in the first place.
Each one of these advantages is very difficult for other software companies to duplicate.
What I was suggesting was:
1. Passport has very little value to people, especially compared to a brower, OS, or productivity suite.
2. Microsoft may force one to use passport down the line, but they aren't with
3. If the Passport model becomes popular, AOL and Yahoo will quickly follow up with thier own implementations.
My Point: The "Microsoft is going monopolize the world via a cheap authentication scheme" theory has too many holes and needs to be overhauled if anybody cares to revisit it, which isn't to say that Microsoft doesn't have a truely ingenious idea for monopolizing the world, that we haven't thought of...
Spend some time mulling that over...
"Communism is like having one [local] phone company " - Lenny Bruce
I suspect a solution for him would consist of several parts - some of which might use Java. I would be bit suprised if he found a completely platform-independant solution.
when my main machine had to be sent away for repairs for a week
I'm trolling, but come on.... You send your PC away for repairs? What kind of geek are you!@?
Things like Yahoo! Mail, Hotmail, and all kinds of webapps are all based on this same principle.
If you're asking about when they'll overcome the shortcomings of a web environment, and look like the desktop you're used to, then look to the applications Microsoft is readying for use on settop boxes, downloading the interfaces to apps like word and excel in an on-demand environment, and storing the data on a central server.
Kevin Fox
What you have to watch out for is that some toolkits and applications written for X11 these days seem to come out of a Windows mentality and assume that they are running locally; Mozilla and Gnome are offenders in this regard (KDE may be as well). They mostly work remotely, but sometimes they make the wrong assumptions about how to communicate with other applications. For example, they may get their resources not out of the display's resource database but out of some local configuration files. Or they may pop up another window on the wrong display. Those things should be reported as bugs when they occur.
Systems like VNC are also great and much easier to set up. However, their big disadvantage is that they remote only a whole desktop; they don't try to integrate multiple applications running on multiple machines. VNC also seems to be more bandwidth intensive than normal X11 sessions, although VNC can be faster than X11 for image-heavy applications (including some "modern" X11 toolkits that ignore all the X11 drawing commands and just blit everything--yuck).
So, my recommendadtion is: use X11 for most remote access, but use VNC for cross-platform applications or if you want a persistent desktop.
Not to be annoying, but if you read the rsync docs (which I just happened to do today) it explains how to do a bi-directional sync. It's pretty trivial, no need for another tool.
This could be just what the doctor ordered to increase the uptake of Beowulf clusters.
The much heralded explosion in personal clustering seems a bit slow in coming. Also, of course, linux clusters can't run e.g. Word. But the remote desktop will change all that. People will at last be able to run all their Office apps on a linux Beowolf cluster!!
Gates is gonna whine that's for sure! But all he's going to get is the slim market for desktops, while linux takes the juicy lions share of the cluster!
Well, I'll jump in and add to this brainstorm we call Ask Slashdot. REBOL is not a remote desktop, but an IOS (Internet Operating System.) Now before you start screaming off topic, consider what he wants to do and the best way to do it. Any thoughts?
What you need is to combine VNC with a distributed (ie. multiple-computer, at multiple-locations, with multiple-ISPs on multiple-backbones) setup. I'm not aware of any automated products for this, what I've done in the past is to have an main CVS repository on one box, and a cron-job that updates it every night from a different machine. If you lose that main box, you'll have a worst-case day old copy of the repository on the other machine, and can still continue to do your work. If it's a big problem with several days of downtime, you can then set the backup as the main CVS server.
This could work for any number of "backup" computers, but even having two will pretty much eliminate the downtime you've suffered before. And you can use CVS to backup all sorts of stuff (code, IDE config files, even binary data).
In the *nix world, esp. if you're used to a command-prompt instead of a GUI, using VNC is often overkill - I tend to use an OpenSSH java applet (such as AppGate's excellent MindTerm), which can run over slow connections without issue, and can be served from any number of computers.
(However, for a Wintel solution, you'd have to find a configuration-management tool that can automatically update stuff for you - not sure if Source-Safe or StarTeam can do this).
What you want is a persistent desktop.
x .asp
The problem with VNC on a large network is that people will start running sessions on different servers. If they are logging in through a firewall, there could be duplicate ports such that two people want access to port 5902.
Additionally, users have to login to the server to start a vnc session. This gets tiresome. Coupled with the problem above, and one has to do a lot of -L gymnastics with ssh.
My current project is to move all vnc sessions to a server that uses KDM's XDMCP facility together with xinet.d to give people login screens through vncviewer.
It's very much like the terminal server solution.
see: http://www.sourcecodecorner.com/articles/vnc/linu
It looks trickier than it is. The benefit here is that there is no need for ssh -L stuff. People just point vncviewer at a designated port on the server
Cheers!
X Window system is flawed. The client-server model is inversed in some bizarre way that a user runs the server and he needs to connect the apps he starts to this server (the only benefit of this, being that the user can in one session start apps that display on different devices/workstations that run separate X severs - almost totally useless...). If the server exits, all apps have to exit too. Only one user can use the server at the same time because the X server is bound th a single, static set of physical display device(s) and input devices... No shared sessions for presentations/courses etc are possible.
Then there comes (my favourite, but still lacking) AT&T's Virtual Network Computing (VNC) which on UNIX-alikes is basically a wrapper that is run on the same machine that applications and acts as a X server for them, while at the other end accepting connections from VNC clients. This way sessions can be shared between users, and one can disconnect from the vnc server (the apps still run uninterrupted, attached to the X11 end of VNC server) then connect later, or from a different machine. So VNC is basically a great step forward. But its development went into stagnation (It hasn't been updated in long, long time) while it lacks many features:
Berlin project is still in its infancy and far from being complete.
I haven't tried Linux Terminal Server Project, but it is, well, Linux only :(
Besides, it seems to me as being only a thin, networked X-terminal. Can someone elaborate on its capabilities pertaining to sharing sessions between users/connecting from different machines to the same session, disconnecting from sessions without killing them etc?
Unfortunately for GPLed software, Microsoft's remote resktop solutions offer most of what I've enumerated here, and Citrix Metaframe is even better... So closed-source software is at an advantage here.
I've never used VNC with windows as the server, but the VNC client (accessing a linux server) worked extremly fast on my windows box. It's quite usable for everyday tasks (even web browsing).
__
Choose mnemonic identifiers. If you can't remember what mnemonic means, you've got a problem. - Larry Wall
seems rather simple to me. backup your data often and you will never be a slave to a single workstation ever. sounds like you don't want to take responsibility for your lack of planning.
How on earth did this get modded up to a +4 interesting?
1. It's simple
2. 2 people learned something
3. It encouraged more/correct information...
"Communism is like having one [local] phone company " - Lenny Bruce
First lets talk physical removal from any machine. Even if you can't carry it around with you, you need not have it hard wired to the box. These boxes from are nice additions to keep you away from things like fan noise. And/Or you might opt for an older, all in one machine, that has an OS and can access the application server(s), like this one that you can find at.
There are a ton of web based email servers that host their own web client. Post.Office by is the best of breed, with other playing in the field for less money. If your local "viewer" is a windows hosted boxen, you can use Exceed from and you will find you can run x11 apps like they lived on your box.
You can find information about mirroring at, and more about load balancing at
You can employee all of these to secure your "server" machine, and sleep shoundly that if you have a hardware failure, you can still be running on your way. However I must inform you that the absolute best way to remove problems from your machine is deinstall windows of any kind.
If you are tied to the Microsoft Platform, you can run Windows Terminal Server and use rdesktop (70KB) to access your desktop from anywhere, security is again in Microsofts hands. rdesktop runs in the XFree86 window environment.
Check it out, www.rdekstop.org
m.carey at mech.canterbury.ac.nz
I have been using VNC for a year now to connect from machines around my campus to my linux desktop. The biggest problem I see is the ability to get to the current state of the desktop computer. VNC is setup to spawn off a new x-session and desktop with each vncserver.
To resolve the problem, VNC reccomends that you connect to the VNC server on your local machine, as well as with remote machines. No matter what they say, the quality is ass and it's slow. Noticibly slow.
Krfb, thankfully, seems to have remedied this problem by creating a bit of KDE software that exports the original X server for remote connections. When you connect, you see your desktop in the exact condition you left it in, not a new X session.
Has anyone used KRfb?
"One touch of Darwin makes the whole world kin." George Bernard Shaw
pretty much exactly what you describe wanting/needing. but you'll pay to play.
Isn't this the whole point of the .Net initiative and Application Service Providers?
While I think renting software is chintzier than 'buying' a license, at least with renting the consumer actually knows where they stand.
With your apps coming off the net from the ASPs and your data on a seperate hard drive, you could concievably gain complete machine independence.
"The" JVM? Aren't there several Java virtual machines available?
There is much good *nix mirroring software which
can sync files between multiple accounts/machines.
VNC or X-Windows, or ssh all work well.
2 + 2 == ____
Fill in the blank yourself.
hash@no-bots-please.nukesylo.com
Just last week, Apple released Remote Desktop, an app like VNC with some other benefits, such as administration, application removal/installation, file copies, etc. to up to 250 other computers AT ONCE. You can also view/control any of the computers with full logging of actions, etc. Very powerful app. Right now, its only Mac-to-Mac, but I'm sure it will be expanded in the future to include support for other OSes as well. It has lots of different settings to optimize performance over various types of network connections, and of course has a beautiful Apple interface. Each instance of the app can handle up to 6000 computers separated into groups of 250 each.
Sounds perfect for schools, organizations, etc. Just think - my company could install/remove any software to ALL of our macs, worldwide, from ONE COMPUTER at HQ. Pretty nifty.
Tarantella from www.tarantella.com is the way to go. Let's you connect and run apps from windows terminal servers, provides good telnet terminal access and provides X windowing abilities. Client is a java enabled web browser. Only drawback is the price.
Im pretty sure the question is about having his environment hosted by some company remotely. and get to it from some other disassociated internet connected java enabled machine. since the idea came from having to send his HDD away... i dont think he wants to setup a server and run backups and install vnc and host solitaire lan parties and be a big geek. :p
My laptop in my dorm room has a static IP address, and I have NetMeeting configured to accept remote connections. So, from any campus computer (they all have NetMeeting installed because it's installed by default) I pop in my IP address and away I go! Log in and my screen pops up.
It's extremely useful AND a great trick - start playing an MP3 remotely OR print something. it's great fun. AND useful. AND free. Sure, it's Microsoft, but hey, that's life.
"It became clear to me (when my main machine had to be sent away for repairs for a week) that it's high time to finally divorce myself from any particular computer by using data and software accessible from any internet connected computer as much as possible."
You're a slashdot reader, and you sent your machine away for repairs?! What kind of geek ARE you?
"All you need is VNC" -- John Lennon
-- If we don't stand up for our rights, now, there will be no right to stand up for them later.
Also, as a former employee, I feel compelled to point GoToMyPC, which is like VNC, but with better compression, nicities like remote printing, and most importantly firewall penetration. (But, yeah, Windows only and expensive.)
I could imagine some new PC with maybe a BIOS problem, hard-drive failure, or any of the numerable M$-W problems that the "tech support" couldn't figure out and suggested that the only resolution was to just send it in ... especially if the user wasn't supplied the installation CD's like HP has been doing.
News For Geeks doesn't necessarily imply *nix-geek.
m.mmm..myyy
Hah... I was about to say "Shame on you!" at first; I misread your last line as
;)
> Sure it's piracy, but try it out. It's much better than WTS
because it's damn sure one or the other
Let's first look at your stated problem:
Which is an easy enough problem to solve. Store data files and the like on a server, and access them through your client PC. For program installs and the like, either keep a swappable PC with all the software loaded, or a Ghost image/duplicate HDD of the PC to be loaded on a spare PC when the time comes. Most OS's can even cope with dissimilar hardware without too much of a pain. For the most part, you could even install to the server and make a backup of the WINNT folder and registry, use roaming profiles, and restore just that to a new machine.
But then, you get into:
Which is a totally different ball of wax. That's the realm of Application Service Providers. While this is doable, it's expensive, cumbersome, and a PITA. And, I think it's one of things MS is trying to do with .NET.
If the latter is really something you want to look at doing, then you have the option of homegrown or ASP.
VNC and Terminal Services (as mentioned) are possible solutions, but, unless you're looking at starting a TS cluster (doubtful), then you're still tied to that one machine. You're just moving your keyboard and monitor further away, with the resultant UI lag. Not a good solution, IMO. What you need are apps that are designed to be internet accessible (and bandwidth conservative) from the start. There's compromises inherent in those solutions, but I think I could live with less features easier than I could with UI lag. Start thinking of your browser as the ultimate front end to your apps. Look for good webmail servers. Productivity apps are a little more difficult, and could entirely depend on what you actually do with them. It's not terribly difficult to code an ASP page that will allow you to enter and edit simple Excel spreadhseets in HTML. I'd imagine Word would be about the same (though I have no experience with Word in that manner). Access and other databases, of course, have well documented, and some ready-made, solutions.
A Visual IDE, though, may be a bit more difficult. It might depend on your language needs. I haven't toyed with VS.NET yet, but I wouldn't be surprised if it was possible to use ActiveX to control it from an ASP page. If not, you may need to design your own internet version of an IDE.
Difficult? Yeah. Time consuming? Absolutely. Necessary? You tell me. Of course, good backups would have had you up and running within 30 minutes of finding another PC.
If you aren't going to be accessing any *nix boxes you might want to take a look at Timbukto . Its nice for Windows and Mac (including OS/X) and is only about 11 Mb installed. The only downfall I have had using it is that it can suck up bandwidth with multiple connections open.
People seem much brighter once you light them on fire.
No matter how you do it - eventually, your data is on *a* machine. Eventually, it's residing somewhere - be it a single server or a couple rsync'd or otherwise servers.
...." yadda yadda yadda - I rsync my data to my home desktop each morning before going to work, I can optionally rsync from work before I leave (but I rarely do as rarely does anything change while at work, I can just ssh to my shell account where my email is coming in to check for any important mails)
My 'solution' - a laptop.
"But its expensive and if it breaks
That said - it's wonderful *always* having your data with you. Yeah I have a palm, but I don't send and recieve my emails with it - and it'd be ridiculous to try with the volume I (and probably most of us) get. The fact of the matter is - I have a hard time envisioning a scenario where I trust someone so much as to plop down on their windows machine with keyboard logger and punch in all my passwords, but I'm fine jacking my laptop into their network and tunneling all my communications to my hearts content.
It's nice to have access to stuff from everywhere - but don't do it at the cost of giving everyone else access.
Oh yeah - and wireless is fun, but tunnel *everything* or all this security advice is pretty much ridiculously useless.
cyn, free software and *nix operating systems enthusiast.
So what is it like to be retarded?
Windows 2000 Terminal Services has a web client that installs on any IIS box and will allow you to access your remote desktop from a web browser. No thin client needed - just hit the website and login and the entire session is within a browser.
Try this, as a remote/virual desktop it kicks ass ...
i n= Produits/Gamme_windows/First_office/
http://www.rightvision.com/index.php?lg=en&chem
Do the Tryonline stuff, it's worth it !
You are an IDIOT! Every thing that spews from your mouth/keyboard is wrong. You must be a troll here to sell us .net and say that the PC is the center of the universe and the world is flat.
Go home and do your homework. Small children who have few brain cells should NOT be allowed to post. If you are real good and do your homework mommy and daddy might increase your allowance...
Your Average Joe
I do this all the time. Just connect to your remote server using ssh, then use screen to maintain a connection-independent terminal to run pine. Then when you connect from another location, just run "screen -d -r" and you can finish typing where you left off.
The nice thing about this approach is that it _just_works_. Even if I sit down to an old green screen terminal at Ye Old Backwater Public Library.
Maybe if you built your own computers systems the problem would already be fixed and you wouldn't need a ``remote'' desktop. Computers aren't that hard to maintain yourself...
I'm not sure from your post if you're using a unix/linux box or a windows box, but if you're using a windows box you might be interested in gotomypc.com. It's basically pc anywhere, except about 1000 times easier to setup and use. And it's reasonably secure.
Programming is not a religion A hobby,job,profession,craft,art. But not a religion
Before I lead to confusion: This product is "not there yet" but it is part of the final plan.
The AmigaDE is a "virtual computer" and thus AmigaDE applications run anywhere. They are binary compatible to all devices the DE engine runs on. Some say: "This is like Java." But it is not. Java is a runtime-environment (in this case) but
the AmigaDE is a fully virtual computer, coming with its own CPU.
What does this mean, especially in referral to your question ?
It means, that all your beloved applications run everywhere. This way you need to carry a disk only, on which you have installed your favourite applications, databases etc. and as soon you find yourself using other hardware the DE runs on, you just slide in your disk and the "virtual computer" deflates. You use the same machine as the one at home, the DE does scale down and adapts to the hardware it is running on, be it a desktop, a PDA, a notebook or a special terminal at the airport (well, I said its not there yet ;-)).
While this does not mean that you access a central server remotely over a network (your question), this way you take your "central" machine away with you on a ZIP/JAZ disk (or so).
This is all very interesting and exciting stuff.
However, Amiga Inc. have not yet shown, who and what they are, and this makes me raise an eyebrow and concerned if we will see the DE ever going so far, to utilize its full potential.
This is such (theoretical at least) a revolution, that it will need time to absorb and get accustomed to. And the market plays an important role as well, sigh.
At the moment the AmigaDE is nothing more than a system running on (I am naming the most important platfomrs only) Windows, WindowsCE.NET, Linux (RedHat offer(ed?)s the SDK on their web-page (once?)) and others, mainly to play games on PDAs.
See here or here (list of mirrors) for a video [mpeg, 85MB] (or DivX v5, 13MB) where it gets demonstrated.
Hello?? Fred?! Is this you?
Sorry... you didn't have FIRST POST
I've recently had to install a remote access situation at work for a bunch of consultants working on a project. We have non-public IPs for our inhouse machines and a couple of webservers with public IP's and then I discovered the magic of SSH port forwarding. We were able to forward PCAnywhere as well as several other TCP ports (the one drawback of SSH is that you can't forward UDP ports) that allowed them to use client programs across the internet without compromising security. In fact its worked too well and almost everyone in the department has asked me to set up their system for PCAnywhere over SSH. Its a poor-man's VPN (which you would use to do it right). But with SSH you can forward VNC and X-Windows, and of course you have your SSH for your unix systems. Does it work well? Well that depends on your bandwidth. Lots of bandwidth makes everything more palatable.
and use the dark side to your advantage.
Any sys ad worth his pay can configure roaming profiles. Any W2K geek can configure TS for remote administration. Use the force -- it is part of you.
http://www.vigor.nu/dxpc/
I'm not saying the dxpc approach is optimal, or good design. I don't know much about X event streams, but it does seem like higher-level operations are appropriate. The thing that X gets right is the assumption that all transactions will be over a network.
http://cc.jlab.org/services/cue/
CUE is an acronym for Common User Environment and is the computing environment provided and supported by the JLAB Computer Center. The primary goal of CUE is to provide users with a standard environment on all supported computer systems with simplified and enhanced systems management. Systems must be configured to operate in this environment as directed in the configurations specified in the Unix, Linux, and Windows web pages, to utilize CUE.
--------------
Remote login is possible via SSH protocol 2. I think our system fulfills all the requirements of the questioner.
it would only add bloat. one click: start ssh. another click: start vnc, and you're ready to go!
Its a violation of the XP EULA to run anything that remotely accesses your desktop on XP, if anyone cares. That said, VNC is real nice, although not quite as interwoven as Terminal Services. But its free! Try TightVNC for slow network connections (but you need decent video and a speedy CPU to compress the data):
http://www.tightvnc.com
Jon Green Cheyenne
Apologies if this has been said, but wtf do you need an IDE for? make, and vi/pico/emacs not good enough for you ?
... nor get outlook trojans/viruses etc.
What about a powerful email tool?
Well, there is elm/pine/mutt (in increasing order of preference)
There are java versions of ssh, or use the infamous PuTTY.
There are a million and one shell companies that you can buy an account from for a few dollars/pounds/groats a month. (Yes I run a small shell provider). Some even are free!
Oh other stuff
web: lynx/links
ftp: ftp(!)/ncftp
file manager?: unix prompt/midnight commander
Now, okay, you cant do much image work, or see your porn
You really need a local windoze box for all that.
Now why do you need a GUI for?
Your "homepage" could have e-mail, file&print access across different servers, and applications. Depending on HOW you're accessing the system it'll change how it delivers apps.
For example, if you're on a high-speed LAN it'll figure out what servers are closest to you and deliver apps to your desktop if they're not already installed. If you move to a different office, it'll change to the closest server that has the apps on it.
If you're at a web cafe or on a dial-up connection, it can deliver the SAME apps via a Citrix session automatically without the user having to pay attention to the underlying mechanisms, keeping track of licensing concerns automatically.
This is not just a simple remote "viewing" solution like VNC and it's not a remote "processing, local viewing" solution like X - it's a way to tie together all of the resources (servers, apps, data) you already have in a solution that the users can easily take with them anywhere without having to change to fit the system. Pretty cool.
Go here for more info on synergy.
Unfortunately, they haven't yet put up any screenshots, but the ones I've seen look really cool... here's a 3rd-party article that gives you a better idea of how this works than I can.
(Yes, they embraced Linux a while back, and yes, ZENworks Synergy is supposed to even extend to handhelds. :)
No, I don't work for Novell - I just think they *still* make some damn fine products (even if their marketing does really suck.)
Jezus holy christ. We were having this whole Internet thing going on, and you still haven't figured it out. Sad.
Pushin' 'n dealin', shovin' 'n stealin'
Try TightVNC. VNC is gross and slow. TightVNC is as fast if not faster than .. well.. anything else I've seen anyway. :)
I have been thinking about the issue of remote GUI's for about 5 years now. Note that I don't expect remote word-processing, graphics, and games to be realistic over typical HTTP arragements any time soon. However, management and database-centric GUI's are prime candidates IMO.
My draft solution is documented at:
http://geocities.com/tablizer/scgui.htm
Here is an excerpt:
Philosophy
----------
Latency-friendly
Can run over HTTP (but not limited to)
Does not require downloading programming to client
Delta-based updates (send only changes)
Open standard
Simple
Latency-friendly
Widgets (clients) don't have to send each keystroke to the server in sub-second turnaround time in order to make data entry smooth. You can reduce transmission to just when the form is finished, or send field contents when a given field is exited (and finer levels may be added in the future). This allows some communications and server-side processing to take place in-between "submits". You can have the browser wait for a response, or simply send the specified information and then continue on without the user even aware that something was sent.
SCGUI gives you a wide range of response options to optimize the interaction between the client and the server. This allows it to be "tuned" to run on a variety of networks, with differing bandwidth and response time delay profiles. It can run on fast networks, or slow networks. (However, it is not optimized for high-speed games. It is mostly intended as a business tool.)
Can Run Over HTTP and Others
Although SCGUI was made with HTTP in mind, it is not limited to HTTP. It could possibly even replace X-Windows, Tk, or the Microsoft Windows protocols.
No Local Programming
There is no application-specific programming logic that has to be loaded and "run" on the client. (The SCGUI browser is not meant to be application-specific).
Applets and JavaScript break into the Pandora's Box of Turing-Complete client-side (browser) execution of content. This creates or increases a boat-load of problems:
1.Complicates the Browser - browser needs a language interpreter.
2.Complicates the Protocol - Software writers have to learn a new programming language. SCGUI is not tied to any one programming language. The GUI Browser will not even be able to tell what language is running on the server.
3.Increases security risks
Turing-Complete usually means introducing general-purpose IF statements, loops, methods, etc. These make the browser and the browser's environment easier to hack, because it allows the hacker to write and place relatively intelligent "agents" on your machine to snoop around and cause havoc. Client-side scripts/applets also can also cause long waits as the browser has to download the script/applet.
Turing-Complete languages also often need constant updating because new bugs or security holes are always being found. SCGUI avoids being Turing-Complete to avoid or reduce these problems.
Delta-Based Updates
The delta-based nature of SCGUI means that we only have to send what changes. With HTML forms, for example, if you want to change one spot on a page, you usually have to send an entire updated copy of the page. With SCGUI, if you want to put an error message on a page, you only have to send the XML code to place that message. You don't have to re-send the whole page.
Open Standard
There are no restrictions on using the SCGUI standard as long as proper credits and sources are given, and non-standard extensions or alterations are fully documented.
Simple
SCGUI is not the only attempt to define GUI's via XML. However, the other approaches I saw were unnecessarily complex. (Also, many did not manage latency and event communication in an HTTP-friendly way, in my opinion.)
Other
SCGUI has no built-in "flow control" for widget layouts because it is assumed that the server handles such. The server can convert flow layouts into coordinates, which is what SCGUI uses. This keeps the client (browser) simple and stable. Future versions will be able to return the width of the client screen (or view area) so that server-based screen managers can scale stuff
as needed for a particular client.
The forest-view philosophy of SCGUI is to have as much of the processing take place on the server as possible, but without affecting or slowing the user experience regardless of network protocols or network speed being used. SCGUI puts into a
protocol what it needs and only what it needs to achieve this. It is a tricky balancing act, but SCGUI is up to the task.
Table-ized A.I.
This is the best remote software i've found for a windows machine, and i haven't seen it once in the comments so far http://www.remotelyanywhere.com/ really, go look at it
Zyrotin
it's called a double standard cause it's twice as right.
Yes, yes, it rides on top of Terminal Services or Windows 2000. But before you go off on a rant, it supports everything as a client from Dos to windows, to Unix, to OS2/warp, to Irix. It has Java clients, Web clients that imbed into a browser(netscape or IE), and did I mention anything that will run JAVA?
NFuse rocks, and guess what they don't just do this kind of thing for windows shells and *nix clients. They have pure java platforms running on linux and solaris. Citrix is way way way out on the power curve when it comes to this stuff. Coming from and admin that supports a multi-national 400+ Citrix node it central administration and control are just wonderful. Anyway I am not hear to get you to use Citrix because it will not be cost effective for most here and I will get bashed for the dreaded Microsoft, but anyone that says that Citrix sucks either never spent enough time working with it, or does not have a clue.
Give it a look.
With SpeedScreen2 the refresh rate is great, I have 40 people per dual proc machine surfing, mailing, and using the office suite. Hell you can even install a rouge copy of citrix and never register it but it will only work for one user tho it will last forever. This is very nice to set up on the box at home for remote access when your out on the road.
Enjoy
Neck_of_the_Woods
#/usr/local/surf/glassy/overhead
Sure VNC and X Windows is great if you have a nice high speed broadband connection where ever you go. However in the real world this isn't always possible.
:0).... I just wish I could convince our CEO to start using IMAP!
:0P Well luckily Mirabilis came up with the solution to this one, the most recent versions of ICQ store your contact list on the server so I never have to get authorisation from anyone ever again :0D
;0)
My problem:
I often move around different computers in the office, every time I get a new computer I have to reinstall everything and I like to have access to everything from home.
My solution:
Firstly, one of the most important things in a business is to keep all your email don't lose a single message. Sow what to do about this? Well I'm in a pretty good situation because I control our mailserver so I configured it to use IMAP as well as POP3. Now I can access all my mail from any computer in our office and from home also. It was particularly handy have home access because it mean that I didn't have to send any email messages that I recieved at home back to myself so I had a copy at work. The mail server is backed up daily to tape so there's no worry of ever losing important messags
(I only have a 33.6k dialup from home by the way)
For those that don't have control of their mail server and can't use IMAP there's always a wide varity of web mail services available.
Next how do I access all those files that I'm currently working with? This one's not as hard as it may seem, that's what file servers are for. Don't keep any of your files on your workstation (this is something that I'm finally starting to get through to my co-workers after 2 years). I use samba to access file within the office, if I'm at home I use a combination of FTP and samba (however samba is a slow dog over a dialup connection). The file servers are of course backed up every day so there is a lot less chance of losing important work than there is if I save everything on my workstation.
The next problem I faced was that pesky ICQ list, every time I changed computer or had to reinstall it I had to get authorisation from everyone on my list again
I've only addressed a few issues here but I hope I've made my point that broadband isn't always the only solution. Especialy when you live in a backward country like Australia where high speed Internet connections aren't readily available to your average underpaid IT employee
Why do today what you can put off until tomorrow?
...as something used for other purpose than fixing remote user's configuration strikes me as ridiculous.
IDE? What IDE? If you want to develop things, you can just keep all your work in CVS, and edit/compile/... it locally or remotely depending on the needs, using whatever software you choose. I usually choose XEmacs and gcc locally (on a Linux box), or ssh to a Solaris box with XEmacs and SunPro compiler, to do the same (for Solaris-specific development). The point is, you don't run compiler remotely because you don't have your sources locally, you bring sources to wherever you want them to be compiled using CVS.
Email? Simple solution -- don't store any email locally in the first place. IMAP will keep and access your mailboxes faster than if they were local, or at least it will be faster if the server is Cyrus.
Everything else is just too trivial -- if it can be run locally, just do that and take care of what files it should bring and update. Simple scripts that update things through scp, or CVS, will make things easier. If it for any reason can not run on whatever box is local, use X, or X over ssh.
Of course, if all you have is Windows on the "server", you have to use Terminal Services, Metaframe or VNC, and they will sheepishly copy screens or draing commands no matter what the purpose. But this is fair -- Windows users must suffer.
Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
What I do, is store in CVS (not just development code, but school work and such), which I run off of my development server (along with all the app servers I use). Then it's just a matter of opening 80, and 2401 in the firewall and installing ViewCVS and I can access anything I need from anywhere.
Another added advantage is that since I constantly have an up to date copy checked out on my main PC, I have a "hot backup" in case either machine dies on me.
It also helps to use a computer and ISP independed email account (like Yahoo), so you can access your mail from anywhere.
It really does help quite a bit to things like this, but I can't see a use for "virtual remote desktops" - your software belongs on the PC which runs it (until you are paying a subscription fee for it, of course), it's your data that's important to get to.
sic transit gloria mundi
How can you mod somthing overrated when it hasn't been modded yet? Real smart cookie there.
--Aaron
anyone try 'Remote Desktop' for OS-X ?
storm's nest.
Doesn'Berlin have the remote capability of X?
http://www.berlin-consortium.org/
Did anyone besides me notice, that the windows RDP server *ALWAYS* uses the same prime for the server<->client key negotiation ?
128-bit my arse, if any small government or large company can spend half a year pre-computing attacks for the single prime number that's used in all windows RDP servers.
Currently, it's limited to displaying a sophisticated online personal profile, the SPACECARD, where you can at the very least include all your contact info and resume. However, we hope to introduce basic server side apps once security issues are dealt with. There is a certain peace of mind associated with knowing where your sensitive data is stored (such as on your computer hard drive!), and once the world goes completely network centric, some may feel uncomfortable not quite knowing where there data is, and how to be sure that when they 'erase' a 'file' it really does vanish from the ether! On the other hand, with so much data out there, trying to locate ('hack / steal'?) specific information may require more effort than simply stealing an actual computer - and getting the whole lot at once from the hard drive!
O'WONDERWe're working on it.
I'm amazed so many people just go for the 'remote desktop' answer (vnc, X, TS).
What you need is a filesystem that will replicate your files and applications for you, and let you keep working with or without a network connection.
AFS is ultra cool, yet a bit hard to install. Scales to 10,000s of users.
Coda seems to have never really made it. Intermezzo is the next big thing waiting to happen.
Microsoft solved that problem too
There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
VNC is nice because it's free, but my company no longer allows it because we found that it eats up a ton of CPU time and memory even when not in use.
So the question in the original post was basically, how can I sit down at any computer anywhere and access my "desktop," whether that be an actual desktop machine or a home folder on a server somewhere. (Yes, I realize that he wussed out at the end and dropped it down to Wintel+Java but bear with me.)
I'm looking for a similar solution. I have the following machines that I'd really like to have access too: 2x Mac G3s running OS9.x on a T1 line, 1x Athlon running Win2K on a T1, 1x SGI Octane2 running Irix on a T1, 1x P2 running RH7.1 on a T1 and 1x Mac G4 running OSX on a Cable Modem (there's also a couple of powerbooks in there running OS9 and X).
So bandwidth isn't really an issue (within limits) but cost and cross-platform-ability is. To make things slightly more difficult, I need to do primary work (and store files locally, with backups of course) on 2 of the Macs (including the OSX G4), the SGI, the Win2K box and the Linux box so a single server/multiple client setup won't work.
VNC seems plausible but what other, low/no cost solutions are out there?
--
There's one thing computing teaches you, and that's that there's no point to remembering everything.
--Doug Copland
With the cost of re-writable DVD drives going down, how about a portable operating environment using the DVD as the storage. Have your OS on that disc along with all your files. Only problem I can see is that the operating system must adjust itself to the current machine's hardware. Any thoughts on this?
Netmeeting http://www.microsoft.com/windows/NetMeeting/Featur es/default.ASPfor winmdows is free and has remote desktop sharing as well as conferencing. You can also keep a directory of machines to connect to which makes maintaining a network of windows machines very simple.
For Windows to *nix, there is MicroImages X server http://www.microimages.com/freestuf/mix/ which is free for the mac. This is fast, easy to use and setup.
As for security, running X over a network is leaving your system wide open. For security you already have TCP port 6000 closed and start x with the notcp which will restrict remote sessions.
Windoze? I dunno, that crap never did network well, now, did it?
I have used mlview-dxpc with very well results using KDE2/KDE3 over DSL. The only problem is a messed up mouse pointer sometimes...
It uses caching and compression and is a lot faster than "ssh -X -C"
http://www.medialogic.it/projects/mlview/
Moritz
I just wanted to vent my frustration about one particular "solution" and hopefully help someone who is thinking about using TS for serious work.
These are things I've experienced. If I'm wrong, please tell me.
Terminal Services is undoubtedly a step in the right direction for Microsoft. Starting a seperate login for connecting users is a great idea (Not Microsoft's idea, but a great idea nonetheless)... The problem is, they didn't DO it right!
There are a number of processes which require someone to be logged in on the system console. This is just dumb for a server.
For example, if you TS in to a Win2k Server and add a scheduled task that does something with network drives, it will FAIL if no one is logged in, because Windows only mounts the network drives when the user who mapped them logs in! Windows "helpfully" unmaps the drives when someone logs out. The only workaround I've found is to use AT.EXE, set the AT user to Administrator instead of SYSTEM, and make the scheduled task mount the drives itself. Pain in the ass!
Also, try going to Task Scheduler and RUNning a task inside a Terminal Services session. It will run..... ON THE SYSTEM CONSOLE! If no one is logged in there, no one sees the app, even if it is set as Interactive.
Microsoft needs to get away from the practice of providing half-assed implementations of other peoples' great ideas.
Aaaugh!
Justin
"Why would God give us a waist if we wasn't supposed to rest our pants on it?" - Rev. Roy McDaniels
If you're really interested in the future, look at the past. Search for info about "Apollo" workstations, and how they were able to replicate data (programs at least) among machines... it is interesting. Google is your friend.
The WinXP EULA does not permit you to use any form of remote-desktop viewer to control an XP box unless the box you are doing the controlling from also has a valid XP license. (remote desktop excluded)
So if you connected via VNC to a WinXP box from a non XP machine you'd be violating the EULA.
But seeing as you probably have a pirate copy of XP anyway you probably don't give a toss..
:-)
Last.fm - join the social music revolution
My company is in the process of rolling out a rather large Citrix solution. It makes even a dial-up connection look like you are running on an old Pentium 90 - 133 PC. Local connections have a barely noticable lag.
The problem with this on an enterprise level is that configuration appears to require training the would make a CCIE look easy, and of course there is the license costs.
The cool thing about Citrix is that they are one of the few who have peeked at the Windows OS code, so their platform is actually a modified Win Kernel.
See Hexonet's RFB software page, I just discovered them thanks to their package being included in Mandrake 8.2 (rfb-0.1.2-7mdk.i586.rpm).
Seems like a good follow-up to (seemingly dead) AT&T's VNC project...
BTW, if you have Mandrake 8.2, be sure to check out the rfbdrake utility (rfbdrake-0.8.2-13mdk.i586.rpm)! It looks awesome!
Are you seriously, or trolling?
No, I'm serious. Sybase does not like Terminal Services at all. You are correct: SQL Server has no trouble, but I imagine MS went through a lot of effort to make it that way.
For example, if IIS needs access to a database (Sybase, in my case), it will not give up control so that your Terminal Server connection can use it (if you needed to connect to it directly).
Very interesting. IIS can access Sybase over TCP/IP, using a high port number (port number escapes me now), and Terminal Services can also run over TCP/IP, using a different port number, so I'm interested (for my own benefit, where the problem is.
Have you changed the obvious things like use a different communication method between IIS and Sybase?
If IIS had an ODBC connection to the database at the console level, the product (accessed through Terminal Services) couldn't open an ODBC connection. I imagine that there would be workarounds - but in this case the communication methods were pretty limited so I was outta luck.
I think that Sybase eventually issued a patch though, but by then we'd moved to the newest version which doesn't have those issues - so it was a moot point.