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!
Windows Terminal Server does this. There are companies that will host Terminal Services from their site and you can access them from anywhere.
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?"
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
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
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!
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
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.
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
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.
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
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?"
'Cos with VNC I can remote access my Dad's Win98 box from my OS X iBook, and fix LookOut Express for him. Can't do that with X-Server or Terminal Services.
www.lucernesys.comHorizon: Calendar-based personal finance
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.
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.
Or set up a raid array ask your disk server. Stick it in your closet, or ou on the net somewhere, and everything else could be a terminal. You could still end up with downtime, but not as much as you might otherwise.
I'm the big fish in the big pond bitch.
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 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!
Remote administration is not the same as a true virtual desktop. Try to imagine yourself in his situation before offering a solution - would you want to do all your work all the time over VNC? I wouldn't. I wouldn't mind it so much over TS or X.
Whats wrong with VNC?
;)
I can only think that you haven't used in on unix, where you can create as many 'desktops' as you want. On Windows it just copies the current desktop to a virtual framebuffer, but under linux is creates an X display and lets applications draw into its framebuffer, which it then sends off over its RFB protocol.
Compared to Terminal Server under win32 it's slightly slower and harder to use, but there are patches etc which improve the compression.
I think of it as 'screen' for X
-Yarn - Rio Karma: Excellent
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
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.
Two things with this, one, you can't access to Win from X (though X from Win is possible).
:).
Another disadvantage when compared with VNC, if the client dies and you are running a remote App using X, the X connection dies and then the underlying application dies with it. With VNC, the server is agnostic about client crashes. Plus, when you need to move, you can detach the VNC session and pick it up elsewhere (like screen for X
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
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!
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
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 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
I agree that Java and .NET have similarities. In fact I believe that Microsoft developed .NET, in part, to hurt SUN. However, .NET does lend itself to cross language development better then Java's VM.
.NET applications that can be sent over the Internet to the PC that you are logged on (After being validated by their Passport servers.). That way they won't have to "sell" software anymore. They can simply sell the right to use a service. Maybe you will pay five bucks per month for their "Office suite service." You would be able to logon to any computer with an internet connection and after being validated by their Passport services you would be allowed to access .Word or .Excell or what ever services you have paid for.
A internet service can be what you describe but Microsoft's vision of internet services is quite different. They want everyone to have a Passport account so that our identities can be validated from anywhere. The will begin to develop
This is coming in the future but not the far future.
The race isn't always to the swift... but that's the way to bet!
What this guys seems to be looking for is a really efficient implementation of XWindows.
You mean like this?
:)
My journal has hot
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.
Tarantella isnt cheap, but if you dont need a lot of Enterprise management functionality, they offer a stripped down version called something like the Linux Starter Pak for under 50 concurrent users, that is signficantly cheaper.
And no, I dont work for them, but I do like their product on Solaris and their tech staff seems to be very unix-saavy, even though they support Windows too.
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
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
...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.
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
As much as I love and rely on VNC, I don't think I'd call it a remote display tech - more of a remote control app, otherwise you need to include PC Anywhere into the list.
While I'm not sure about Enterprise, the other three give each person their own session on the remote machine, where VNC just lets you see the console and can be cranky about sharing.
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.)
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
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.
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.
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?"
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?
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.
It's not *too* difficult to get something like this working. I've got my machine at home set to do it now. You need to put in a line like:
/etc/services.. Then you've got to set up xinetd to call Xvnc by adding a "vnc" file into the /etc/xinetd.d directory with content like:
/usr/bin/Xvnc
vnc 5950/tcp
in
service vnc
{
disable = no
socket_type = stream
protocol = tcp
wait = no
user = nobody
server =
server_args = localhost -inetd -once -broadcast -geometry 1024x768 -depth 16
log_on_succes += USERID
log_on_failure += USERID
}
I'm sure I've left something out (like some settings in X) but hopefully this will get you aimed in the right direction.
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.
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.
Actually, I think it is possible to access Win from X, but it requires an expensive proprietary server app (whose names eludes me for the moment, but I did find it on google...)
Reminder: find a new sig
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....
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.
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.
You know, "technically" this is correct. X is braindead in many ways. BUT - it works. It also works MUCH better than Windows for remote operation, and does so without expensive licenses (Citrix, Win TS, etc.)
For distributed desktops in a corp environment, Unix / X works fine. You don't run remote X, you run local X with shared drives for accessing data / non-standard apps. Automounters can even handle different platforms automatically handling different OS versions, processors, etc.
VNC / timbuktu, PCAnywhere, etc. work, but none will give you acceptable performance over a modem for all but the most simplistic tasks. The only thing that runs "well" over a modem is text sessions.
It all depends on what you are trying to do and what you are willing to put up with from a reliability / security / performace standpoint.
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
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?
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:
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
"Small children who have few brain cells should NOT be allowed to post."
I wholeheartedly concur...
Contrary to popular belief, coding is not all free blow-jobs and beer. Those things cost MONEY!
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?
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.
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.)
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
anyone try 'Remote Desktop' for OS-X ?
storm's nest.
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.
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
I use x0RFBServer.
http://www.hexonet.de/software/x0rfbserver/
I am wondering if Krfb is better now! Seems they do the same thing.
Knowledge is like ignorance.. too much can be just as bad as not enough.
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
Tarantella is the Swiss Army Knife of remote access. you can connect it to applications which are programmed in X, Windows Terminal Server or HTML. Your display device can be a native client (Unix or windows) or a java enabled browser.
So you can have your desktop available on SunRay in the office, or via your laptop when out of the office. Or you can access the office securely from an Internet cafe. It's well thought out.
Dunstan
The last scintilla of doubt just rode out of town
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.