Slashdot Mirror
Thin Client Handhelds For Multiple OSs
c0d3po3t writes "An article on CNet tells us that
two Singapore programmers have developed a system to allow one handheld operating system to run any application - Windows or Linux. Sounds like a good idea, but will their idea of network emulation be solid?" I can't really see the use for this except environments where your handheld has network access (the system is network based) and you have
multiple legacy systems to deal with. It just doesn't sit right beyond the
gee-whiz factor for me.
VNC is available for Symbian OS v5.0 and v6.0 devices as well, including the Nokia 9210. Here's the link:
http://www.imhotek.com/
"I have opinions of my own, strong opinions, but I don't always agree with them." -- George H. W. Bush
...getting Windows apps to run on Pocket PC. The problem was changing their UI. Think of M$ Word--do you really want three or more toolbars that stretching across 1024 pixels, a menu bar, a status bar, an autoshape bar, and a title bar squished on a 320x320 screen? Of course not.
Now, if somebody gets technology to dynamically reformat any application's UI into an appropriate format for that presentation device, then I'll start buying. In the meantime, if you don't mind, I'll continue developing ports of my apps under J2ME.
Jouster
it's just VNC, isn't it
No, because the application data here is stored locally, and not on the server. But how much of a difference that will make is open to question as, the data has to be uploaded at the start and downloaded at the end.
Both the slashdot and the cnet article are very misleading. They do _not_ run applications on the handheld, they run applications on the handheld and a server, having the server do all the heavy work (notably OS calls). While not exactly the same as X11, it is strikingly similar.
MXI (that's what they call their system) has a couple of advantages over X. First of all, it doesn't require huge amounts of bandwidth. Secondly, the cnet-article claims that ``people can edit a document without being online.'' This suggests a system which is far more sophisticated than X. However, I doubt if it will be possible to _start_ applications without being connected. Anyway, I will stick to picogui for the time being. It has network transparency like X, but talks widgets rather than pixels, saving tons of bandwidth, and was specifically designed for handhelds, although it has potential on desktops, too.
Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.