Slashdot Mirror
The PC Display has Left the Building
Makarand writes "A new class of PC displays, called Smart Displays, that will use Wi-Fi to effectively decouple
themselves from the PC will be unveiled next week at Comdex. Special software
from Microsoft ( code-named 'Mira') will be at the heart of these displays
allowing them to communicate with any PC running Windows XP within Wi-Fi range ( typically several hundred feet ). The surface of a Smart Display will be touch sensitive allowing you to interact using a finger or a stylus."
Now I can look at everyone else's porn as well as my own!
Excellent FP.
Why not fork?
I'll bet opengl runs fantastically on these things.
Thanks Microsoft!
I interact with my Windows XP using a finger all the time.
If you open yourself to the foo, You and foo become one.
Because when I think "security" I automatically think "Microsoft" and "802.11b."
If sure these will just FLY off the shelves, so people can ensure that the script kiddie next door will be able to watch in realtime as you type up your post to alt.members.nambla-- before you even hit the "Submit" button!
first post? Hey.. i'm seeing your pc on my tablet! what happens? ohh.. microsoft software transmit de video.... i understand...
Think of the potential harm you can do by sniffing these networks.. Everything concerning patients in hospitals is classified information isn't it?
WABOS! If Mira is so great, will it allow a portable to see a server's window? And how is it better than VNC and a portable that can cost the same?
Think of the bandwidth situation:
The average LCD screen is 1024x768x4(bytes)x60hz = 188,743,680 bytes per second of transfer over a wireless connection.
I have no idea what kind of wireless system can transfer data like that, so there would definitely be a loss in picture quality somewhere.
It's a neat idea, but without a real connection, data cannot travel that fast, and there's probably proprietary software behind it that would make it a WXP monitor ONLY, for whatever method it uses.
So now some war driver is going to be able to intercept the communications between my touchscreen monitor and PC? I think I'll pass.
How can we afford to ever sleep
So sound again
--ebtg
Hmmmm. This is actually kinda cool and innovative which surprises me as it came from the company whose only true innovations that I am aware of are Clippy and Bob. Does anyone here know if this technology was home grown, or did Microsoft purchase this as well?
Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
What would make someone want a new class of PC displays that will use Wi-Fi?>
;-D
Why the Microsoft ads on Slashdot of course!
Oops, that was the answer to the last question
Department of Physics and Atmospheric Science, Dalhousie University, Halifax, N.S., Canada, B3H 3J5
Also, wouldn't this make things a little TOO easy. Before, someone could easily comprimise your network, they still had to work to hit anything else, now you are giving them access directly to your desktop.
maybe they'll use VHF or UHF style transmitting or some weird thing like that.
The resolution of a touch screen is reduced because fingers (or stylus) are much fatter than mouse pointers.
I like touch, but recognize the limitations involved as I have worked on touch drivers in the past.
Fight Spammers!
I'm curious, does writing on a screen ever make scratches, even after years of heavy use?
Also the model mentioned is $1300 for a 15" next year, while you can pick up a $700 Samsung 19" LCD at Best Buy today.
I hope they're using some sort of compression. The typical 1024x768 pixels x 8 bit per pixel (let's be generous) x 16 frames per second (ditto) gives... well, a really huge number of bits per second :-).
No... Imagine having a VNC terminal running on your LCD screen (complete with RAM and processor)-- no need for inputs, disk, etc. And another terminal running 'locally'. So now, not a whole lot of bandwidth is required to show images, and you in effect have a "wireless" screen.
It seems we can do an open source solution quite quickly...
I demand a million helicopters and a DOLLAR!
Somebody check my math here, but an 800x600 resultion display with 24 bit color depth needs 11,520,000 bits to be described uncompressed. Yeah, I know there's all sorts of compression than can be applied, but this is going to need something along the lines 40X compression effectiveness in order to fit into an 802.11b signal, or about 10X if you want to use 802.11a. Mira had better be very good at shrinking the bandwidth down.
How many of these things can work within the same office building at once before the Wi-Fi bandwidth gets saturated and ends up jamming the other wireless networking functionality as well?
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Now for a limited time, you can buy a product to sniff both X10 networks and users porn^H^H^H^Hdesktops!
Only $199.99 for this amazing device!!!
(note, not garenteed to break ssh tunnels)
This
there are already ways of having a remote desktop, like Terminal Server or PC Anywhere or the X window system.
none of those require you to have any app installed on your system in order to run it, and neither requires hundreds of megabytes of transfer per second.
This is exactly what I was thinking. I could see this working for relatively static screens like you'd have with web browsing or typical business apps, but I can't imagine this working well for games or watching videos...
The surface of a Smart Display will be touch sensitive allowing you to interact using a finger or a stylus
Now I can actually finger a user using a real finger.
$cat
perhaps they dont transfer the entire screen, but the differences-->similar to rsync.
-- john
It will only be crap if you're playing UT on it. With normal desktop use very few pixels from one cycle to the next, and there is pretty good image desktop image compression technology already in existance with Remote Desktop. I assume the system also is able to handle the desktop image separately from the rest of the screen. The bandwidth you calculated is an absolute maximum, and really isn't very meaningful.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Basicly Microsoft has just invented "the terminal". I already do this with my iBook. Its pretty creepy running XP remotely in full screen. Its unlikely that anyone will be able to play games with it.
Also, Microsoft's remote desktop sharing in windows XP can't supply lag-free computing over a 100Mb ethernet connection, so how poor will 12 mb wi-fi be? Will you have to disable your backgrounds and not be able to stream movies? A portable screen to watch DVD's in bed on would be great, but can it do that?
Lastly, is this like wi-fi integrated into the LAN or is it dedicated to the PC? Does each screen need a different access point built into the computer or can multiple people hook up to the same 2k server box, for example? Also, if it is part of the lan, can you use multiple access points and get service between your desktop in your office and your screen anywhere in the company or on the campus?
I haven't posted in so long, my sig is out of date.
Sorry about the typo.
My monitor can show me full-motion video... can this thing? If it can't, then it's not a full replacement for my desktop monitor like the article claims it world be.
.mpg file playing.
Yes, you can make sprites out of Windows icons and the such, but that still doesn't work when you have an
This does bring up some interesting security issues, will the wifi network be encrypted in any way?
And I just subscribed...
Damn.
Honestly this is something I've wanted for a while as a way to put my DVD Player (computer) in a hidden, out of the way place and allow it to be controlled from a screen sitting at the couch. But at the price listed in the article, (1k-1.25k for first generation Viewsonics), the screen will be worth signifigantly more than the computer.
I'd also like to know if a standard monitor connected to the computer is needed to boot the computer. I'd assume that unless your boot process enters Windows XP w/o interaction that you need another monitor/periferal set to boot.
Finally, Can these be used with linux? If they are running Mira or windows CE for portable displays or whatever you call it it sounds like there is a small amount of internal memory to store the OS. Could these be converted into a linux thin client?
I do security
Comment removed based on user account deletion
When it comes to touch screen stylii are about par with the mouse. The finger on the other hand depends on the user: Calista Flaaaaughheart : mouse/ stylii
Tony Soprano : Oven mitts (don't kill me Tone! I'd follow you into the gates of hell! Specially with them oven mitts; open doors, smack people. FuuuhgetAbowit)
What is the name of that method of evesdropping on a user by intercepting the radiation from the monitor?
This brings a whole new meaning to evesdropping using the video output.
And even if the output is encrypted, somthing tells me that there would either be one master key, or some sort of escrow system that we have no control over. It seems like this technology would be great for the feds, and maybe a silent part of MS's agreement with the DOJ.
"We will market this technology, making it so pervasisve as to be the prefered method. Once everyone is using it, you can evesdrop on anyone, since we will give you the master key. In return, you slap our wrists on this other thing."
Instead of buying some proprietary solution:
Why not use a large lcd screen, a compact flash (or similar) HD, 128mb or so ram, and a small processor, and a PXE (network) boot over the 802.11 connection?
(essentially a large screen, minimal hardware, networked tablet PC)
That way the corporation can run whatever software it wants.
As people have pointed out though, its going to be hard to display movies or games on these (or videoconfrencing for that matter)
This
That is exactly how they are going to work. The desktop sends view data to the tablet, not individual pixels. Most views don't change every frame, so that consumes much less bandwidth than sending everything every frame. This means that for most uses, there is very little noticable difference between this and a local monitor, but if you are running, say, Unreal Tournament 2003, this will slaughter your framerate.
It seems to use the MS Remote Desktop Connection feature to recreate the desktop with very little overhead in either processor time or bandwidth.
Assuming that it does operate as I stated above, then it shouldn't be too hard to get it to work with VNC or somesuch on non-Winxp computers.
Makarand writes:
The surface of a Smart Display will be touch sensitive allowing you to interact using a finger or a stylus."
This sounds suspiciously like my girlfriend...
My
Limekiller
Given the way Remote Desktop currently works, remote 3D (or any app that writes directly to a framebuffer such as PowerDVD or most TV tuner software) won't be possible. (I know - I've tried TVs, DVDs, and 3D games over RDP with no luck.)
Remote Desktop doesn't read from the framebuffer. It switches the primary display to a virtualized video card and monitor with capabilities set by the client system (resolution, bit depth, etc.).
You can check this. Fire up a RDP session into an XP Pro box and open the display control panel. The video adapter listed won't be the physical video card you've got on the system.
Hopefully I'll turn out to be wrong about Mira devices (and Microsoft will have drivers reading from the card itself, making 3D and DVD possible), but with their past record, I'm probably right.
"Evil will always triumph because good is dumb." -- Dark Helmet
I have used Terminal Services to watch video I use it a lot to transmit audio so it should be fine as long as the computer in the LCD screen can handle it.
This must be Thursday, I never could get the hang of Thursdays.
This sounds like something that Bill Gates thought up. It's like the Tablet PC: a solution in search of a problem.
Always remember that in the absence of other people's good ideas to steal, Microsoft attempts to "innovate." The result is usually crappy ideas that come from none other than Gates himself (the Tablet PC has been his pet project for a long time).
What's the point? Wireless displays? Why bother, when you can build an entire wireless computer in a form factor that isn't any larger than this wireless display? And of course you can simply remote your applications, using HTTP or X11, or even RDP if you really insist on staying in the Winworld. Sorry, I don't see any usefulness here.
Tired of FB/Google censorship? Visit UNCENSORED!
Wi-Fi covers more than just 802.11b. I think that's just a buzzword in this story... this is a proprietary technology so there's no reason MS couldn't have tweaked something about normal 802.11 technology to get the kind of bandwidth they needed (at the expense of other things like interferrence, I'm sure.)
I think the number of security patches for windows and other microsoft software has been decreased to a level thats quite low these days. Open source security patches on the other hand has increased heavily.
Ofcause, so some degree hackers focus on software thats actually used and since the use of open source has increased it gets more attension than before.
I assume most slashdot readers know by now that the slashdot editors is favoring censorship, they moderate down posts that alter their perception of reality and even blocks the IP for people posting things they don't like (and no, I'm not talking about spammers posting crap like goatsex links).
Other questions: Does it require the OS to be up to be used (basically, must I plug in a real monitor to fiddle with the BIOS?) and will these be the "Windows Modems" of monitors?
I don't think these are for me.
Belief is the currency of delusion.
since this is most likely just an embedded windows+RDP client...
how long till someone can get this new display hardware, install linux+X+rdesktop ( http://www.rdesktop.org ) and undercut microsoft in the market?
Based on upvotes, Ageism is the only "-ism" Slashdotters care about and think isn't SJW
What advantages does a remote screen have over a notebook? (or tablet?)
I guess it would deter employee theft, because it wouldnt work outside the network.
But does it really make financial sense to buy something for inter building work, and then have to buy even more stuff so that employees can work outside the building (ie trips).
Or do they envision this thing to replace desktop PC's with wireless screens and massive centralized servers? (and what would the cost benifit be? it costs $500 to buy a full desktop PC, vs $1k for the wireless display, and then $50k for a server)
This
Comment removed based on user account deletion
I don't believe it one bit. They purport to be able to send "video" through the air? Over long distances? Sorry, but for now I think we're stuck with cable television and cabled monitors. I just don't see how receiving pictures from thin air would work.
But think of the possibilities if it did! We could turn on a TV anywhere and receive the latest news and watch our favorite shows. We would no longer be restricted by wires. Imagine that, wireless TV!
qslack.com
Great, so now Microsoft is creating so that everyone needs to buy two licenses to run a Windows PC. One for the computer and one for the display.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Anyone with some UI experience in touch screen will tell you that a Web sites are not designed for touch control! security and data/bandwidth compression allowing, this looks like a nofty tool to me.
Just as programs such as PC Anywhere don't need to transmit every single pixel of the screen for every frame, here too you can simply transmit the parts of the screen that need updating (ie, parts that have changed since the previous frame). Windows already does this internally (partial screen redraws), so it shouldn't be too hard to implement. Most of the time, you'll only need to update a small area around the cursor. If you don't have a cursor, and instead use a finger or pen, you don't even need to update that.
Of course, you probably won't get brilliant performance in action games, but I doubt any action game fanatic would use a touchscreen (or even an LCD) anyway.
Oh, and you can transmit a lot more than that using wireless, but using partial updates you will probably never need to.
RMN
~~~
The resolution of the finger should actually be as precise as you can move it, because all the program has to do is calculate the center of youir finger from the edges.
Ok, not to mention the fact that I'm sure they will use some sort of proprietary packet formatting (this is Microsoft we're talking about people) that only the display (or a really clever OSS developer) will be able to decypher. That alone is secure.
check this out ----- one of my previous post
Didnt we just get the tablet? What is the benefit in this over that?
...so using WiFi encryption would have your session doubley encrypted I guess.
If you haven't played around with RDP, checkout rdesktop ( http://www.rdesktop.org/ )
Based on upvotes, Ageism is the only "-ism" Slashdotters care about and think isn't SJW
It took me years to get a PC on my desk instead of a "dumb terminal." Now that there are Smart Displays, the ones everybody already has will become "dumb displays." Sigh.
Guess what you can do with a proprietary digital interface connecting your monitor to your trusted computing platform? That's right! You can add in more Digital "Rights" enforcement mechanisms! Remember that the ultimate goal is total secure control over all the electronics between the media and the glowing phosphor in the screen and the vibrating elements in your speakers.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
I can see the next logical step in this...
1) Create Tablet PC with built in 802.11b
2) Create Wireless Display for 802.11b
3) ???
4) Take over the world
5) Profit becomes irrelevant
You can have it fast, accurate, or pretty. Pick any 2.
Ok, so I take a seat in the campus computer lab. They have just installed these marvels of market coersion wireless screens.
1. Instead of comfortably resting my hand over the mouse I have to do John Madden calesthenics to move things around on the screen "Boom!"
2. I don't really know if the screen I'm looking at is actually showing me the image from the computer where I am sitting.
3. I discover that it doesn't really matter that I am not looking at "my" computer, as long as nobody else sees the one I am using... until I try to use the keyboard.
4. It's all OK because although I'm not using my computer, I have a wireless keyboard, and it happens to be typing on the computer whose image I'm seeing.
5. I notice while I'm using this computer, that there is a lot of personalized stuff, and in fact I am using the computer of my accounting professor from his office on the floor below. I sneekily email his next test to myself.
6. Feeling smug about the test, I finish typing my report, print it, and reset my station, inadvertently destroying the work of a really cute girl on the other side of the lab.
7. While waiting at the printer for an unusually long time, I realize that my report with my name on it has just been printed on my accounting professors personal laserjet... in his office.
8. Feeling less smug about the test, I wonder to myself... When did computers start to suck so bad?
I hate this idea
Well, you'll always need a lot of bandwidth to show _images_, but showing the structure and locations of icons and stuff is where you can find your speed.
The article shows a bit of "clue" by writing "How it works is fairly simple. The computer sends the data needed to create the icons and pictures for display using Wi-Fi." Of course the fact that it uses Wi-Fi is fairly uninteresting, that our friends from Redmond have made something (well, very much) like VNC is more interesting. It is a thin-client protocol of course.
Maybe, the VNC people _should_ have a look at this. I can't seem to quickly find the VNC license, is it GPL or something else?
...Microsoft's "Smart Displays" are nothing more than "Dumb Terminals". I guess when you use Microsoft, you really lower your standards.
...just my 2 gil.
Oops, i tried replying to SexyKellyOsbourne, sorry.
Sounds like they thought of embedding a VNC client with an 802.11 card into an LCD display. It's a nifty idea, really; the concept of decoupling the user interface from devices is interesting. For example, assuming VNC was the standard remote display protocol, imagine the following scenario:
1. The display (LCD monitor with a VNC client) broadcasts discovery beacons
2. Devices in range respond. Your stereo, fridge, computer, laptop, handheld, watch, all equipped with VNC servers, announce themselves.
3. The LCD monitor shows a list of discovered devices. You pick one to interact with, say the stereo.
4. The user interface designed by the manufacturer of the stereo pops up on the LCD monitor.
Now repeat the above with a similarly capable TV, or head-mounted display. Very cool. (Security is not really a problem, all this can be end-to-end encrypted and authenticated).
Admittedly, the mechanism is conceptually similar to HTML-based user interfaces. Howeveer, the difference is that the VNC-based system is less restricted in what the servers can display; with HTML, the servers are restricted to using browsers and the kind of interaction they induce. Also, the HTML system, due to requiring a browser, is more heavy-weight.
Tsunami -- You can't bring a good wave down!
Come on! It is nothing more than VNC over Wi-Fi! One calls this "embrace and extend" and this time VNC is the victim.
i love how slashdot editors scream for "your rights online", but give their own readers no rights at all. just the iron fist of their dictatorial powers.
Should they use Bluetooth as communication protocol rather than WI-FI? Otherwise, what is the point of having bluetooth in the market? I always thought that the existence of bluetooth is to connect several devices together without wires... So now, they try to replace WI-FI with bluetooth??
My first thought, when reading this article, was "What about non-Windows users?" Then, after reading the comments, "Why is no one bringing up non-Windows users?"
But then, after a moment, I thought this-- would Linux/other "geek" OS users want to use a WiFi monitor, with all the inherent security concerns (not necessarily actual exploitable threats, but the scary POSSIBILITY of such a threat) involved?
Honey, I shrunk the Cygwin
This is windows XP (and higher) only. Windows XP already comes with a VNC client server setup that works quite nicely. I can log in as any user and it operates at pretty decent speeds. Just wish multiple logons were possible. Either way, this is what they are using I'm sure. Infact if you bought a tablet PC with wifi you could probably do this right now, but hopefully as these will be dedicated towards VNC they will be significantly cheaper.
Why not embed Linux and the XFree86 XServer on this wireless PC( I mean innovative display system ) and have xdm running on the beige box under the desk?
Wow, a remote display! How revolutionary!
If you want a taste of this then get a Sharp Zaurus, a WiFi card and install the XServer on it. You don't have the realestate of a 1028x768 display but the idea is the same.
Boy, this Microsoft thing is pure genius. NOT.
LoB
"Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
Didn't Viewsonic already do this? Slashdot Article
Basically an RDP session to the dekstop. Cool for certain applications, and could easily be applied to a X-Windows session too...
D.O.U.O.S.V.A.V.V.M.
Now, I know that virtually nobody on Slashdot has a job, or for the most part, even graduated from high school yet, but this *does* have real world applications. Since this was picked up by ABC news, every story they do is gonna revolve around fat ass home users on their couches. BUT, this thing does have a very practical use.
I'd like to get a few for my store. I have PC's up front, all networked, running my POS systems. I don't really have room for them, and the wires networking them to the back room are a pain. This will be a perfect solution. I can get rid of the PC's in the front, I don't need to worry about employees tripping over wires, and I even have the touchscreen feature that I need.
My guess is that MS had this in mind when developing this, but you can't exactly explain that to ABC News, which caters to people with an average IQ equal to that of a doorknob.
Anyone seeing some hackers or someone else watching your screen and LOOKING AT YOUR FINGERPRINTS THAT YOU ARE PLASTERING ALL OVER YOUR SCREEN? Think of it, if your finger interacts digitally, your fingerprints must have some sort of part in it. If so, your fingerprints are being copied while using the monitor. If that's not the case, just think of the capabilities.
I think you're missing the point:
How it works is fairly simple. The computer sends the data needed to create the icons and pictures for display using Wi-Fi, a wireless communication standard typically used to network different computers. The smart display picks up the data using a built-in Wi-Fi receiver and creates the images as needed.
"Data needed to create icons", not the icons themselves. This isn't a device that recieves output from the graphics card, it probably has its own chip for rendering.
Now (knowing this crowd) I know I'm going to get flamed for this, but I'll put it out: I want on of these. Not a wishy-washy TabletPC, but a "SmartDisplay."
As opposed to trying to find all the negatives about it (although I do agree on the security and bandwidth points), think of what you could do with one of these. Put it by your bedside table and read the newspaper/your email from the comfort of bed on Sunday morning. Watch a movie from your hammock in the backyard in the summer. Imagine a six-hundred student lecture with one of these terminal in each seat - interactivity that wouldn't suck.
Collaborative work in a design-office setting. Wanna get the guy across the room's opinion on what you did? Bring the screen over to him. Or pretty much any application that needs acces to huge amounts of visual information - categroized bad on where it is either on the monitor wall or on the Mira. And lastly, you know you want to be like Elliot Carver in Tomorrow Never Dies, working off one of these and a two-story video wall.
I was actually considering rolling one my own of these things for my dorm (so I could use my computer from bed and across the hall) - two WiFi cards, a laptop, and VNC. Then I remembered that I didn't have the cash for an AP and the the battery life on the laptop blew.
Oh well, I'll wait until these things get cheaper. And would your opinion on this whole thing be different if the words "MS" and "Bill Gates" had nothgin to do with it - what about a <fav distro>-based SmartDisplay?
Cue The Sun...
so lets see...for a thousand bucks i can buy a smart display, for which i'll also need to have a constantly running winxp pro machine with wifi card...or for a thousand bucks i can buy a low end ibook and take the 200 bucks i would've used on xp pro to buy an airport card and a wifi router...hmmm...i think i know where my money would go...too bad i already have the ibook/wifi setup...
I'll turn into a supernova and burn up everything. Well I'll turn into a black little hole and you'll turn into string.
so if at the heart of this is microsoft software, is it going to be an open api, it is communications software and they are legally required by the settlement to fully disclose it right? Or are they going to use a proprietary protocol or half publish the api so the display is choppy if using anything other than microsoft software? Wireless display's are neat and all (with proper security of course) but it hardly bursts my bubble if I have to install windows, windows xp no less to use it. It'll be worthless to troubleshoot with if I can't adjust my bios settings as well.
You are dumb.
Fortunatly, Thinkgeek has something for the people who have to work with you.
I read on The Register that Mira will not support DVD viewing, apparently as a result of MPAA restrictions. Apparently retargeting the display is the equivalent of copying the DVD in the MPAA's opinion. If true, this is a ridiculous limitation.
I know this is probably redundant but the only real use for this is DRM control. How better to handle DRM than not allowing the video stream to the monitor.
Got Code?
Really? I did know (this has probably nothing to do with the fact that i have used XP only once, it really cannot interest me). "Either way, this is what they are using I'm sure", i'm sure you're right.
If its just for dvd to tv consider trying a transmitter from a tvout port and a wireless keyboard/mouse, this setup cost me £60 and is great for films, although it would be useless for applications on a TV screen. On the plus side it will work with any OS supporting tvout
Now not only can people view the packets on the LAN, they can see my screen as well similiar to x-10 vid cam wardriving.
Sounds like a remarkable waste of wireless bandwidth.
Are they going to compress it? Common. 1280x960 at 32bpp and 60hz is a LOT of bandwidth. Even 1024x768x16@60hz is a lot, relatively. I'm guessing they'll at least skip sending static data, which means it may not be able to handle realtime fullscreen displays (i.e. games, flybys, or just scrolling with your web browser or word processor fullscreen).
Just what the world needs. A local display that is as slow as a VPN or term services window over a marginal T1 connection. And it will cost an arm and a leg. And don't forget batteries.
-Vic If you can't figure out my email, then don't.
XP does not come with VNC preinstalled. You are probably thinking of Remote Desktop, which comes with XP Professional. While VNC xfers bitmaps of the screen, Remote Desktop xfers low-level Windows API calls. This makes it much more efficient and very fast, even on a low speed connection.
-------------------------
slashdot@com.jarnot (swap the domain)
If this device could also act like a Pronto and you could also control your stereo, tv, dvd, etc. When (if) they get zero-config networking into electronics. A device such as this would be all you would need to control all your devices around the house. I was really hoping Apple would have come out with something like this. Their digital hub strategy would work much better with a product such as this. Security issues aside, with added features and capabilities, such a device would be great in a digital/wireless home.
That's about what I was thinking, myself... Which leads me to believe that MS is doing this because with these monitors, they get tithed for TWO copies of the Windows OS rather than just one for every PC sold. ;-)
In order to avoid various security problems, bandwidth problems I think it makes more sence to use an infrared receiver/transmitter. This will need require some allignment of receivers/transmitters of course.
You can't handle the truth.
Doesn't this seem like a waste of good wireless bandwidth? The amount of traffic you can send through the air is limited and I would much rather use that bandwidth for connecting to other computers (i.e., the Internet). As the number of computers using this technology grows, the less bandwidth there will be available for useful applications.
They already have this done. A friend of mine brought one over one evening. Uses a touch screen lcd with an 11b interface to a brick with a PIII in it. He said police buy them, put the brick in the trunk and the touch screen display on the dash with suitable software. The brick is ruggedized for auto use. It's a Toughbook model 07.
Toughbook 07
Screen seemed a only a little bit slow, I would not recommend it for a LAN party but for a routine traffic stop or food order it looks OK to me. Win2K was the OS.
Hedley
Why not embed Linux and the XFree86 XServer
Because RDP is a better protocol than X -- lower bandwidth and less percieved user latency.
It's the same reason Sun's 'smart' terminals don't run X11.
Please mod me up - I'd like to get some answers on this.
www.rdesktop.org works wonderfully with WinNT TS, and Win2K TS.
Are there any kind of patches for it that will make it work with XP/.NET (RDP 5.1)?
Get your own free personal location tracker
Basically this product is nothing new, in my opinion. Its just a combination of neat packaging and an unhealthy dose of Microsoft marketing.
Not to say this product is worthless, but realize this is more microsoft hype than revolutionary device.
A slip of the foot you may soon recover, but a slip of the tongue you may never get over. -Benjamin Franklin
called VNC on a Palm. Plus, I don't have to use such a large screen. Yeah, I also use Windows XP's 'Remote Desktop' (which is functionally the same as VNC,) to use my desktop's resources from my miniscule Sony PictureBook.
The only problem, (assuming that this uses the same basic technology as Remote Desktop,) is that you can't watch ANY kind of video due to lack of bandwidth. Even if the MPAA said it was okay, you wouldn't want to watch a DVD, as full screen video only comes through at about 2-4 frames per second. (Unless they improved that by streaming the file rather than the display pixels, like the currently do.)
Another non-functioning site was "uncertainty.microsoft.com."
The purpose of that site was not known.
Remember the post the other day about the demise of Comdex? I'm in need of a wireless screen thingy. Now I know where I can get one & don't have to go to Comdex (Windex as noted in that post a few days ago).
It's called X windows?? Sorry Unix had this 40 years ago.
A few years back I bought a KVM for my home office (3 machines, 2 laptops). While it suited my needs at the time, what I really want is a switch that allows keyboard/video/mouse (audio would be nice too) over RJ-45, instead of the 20lbs of cables current KVM switches need.
Now I use VNC & XWin32 for the linux boxes, but it would really be nice to have my noisy win2k box in the office closet and still be able to play QuakeIII without being restricted to placing the machine 6 feet from the monitor. And even things like dvd's/mpegs won't display over VNC.
"Crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and hear the lamentation of their women." - Conan
./ seems liek a good source to keep up to date with announcements and memos "leaked" from MS. ./ also makes agood serive of directing taffice and visitors to MSN.
Remote Blue Screen of Death
The Magic of 'Mira'
Around here (San Jose) my mexican buddies would have translated the above statement to..
The Magic of 'Shit'
Mira=Shit in spanish, no joke!
I think that sgi has had this going on for a while now...
http://www.sgi.com/visualization/van/
... to them, they are apparently oh so worried about whats going on on there pc and anything that presents a potential 'physical' security hole really 'freaks' them out like they actually have a bunch of people waiting to bust into there system, and they have some 'super' sensitive data on it... give me a break, and if this 'really' is the case, just dont use it, as for the rest of you, i guess your all being paranoid for the sake of being paranoid...
Never mind what happens when you try to run dozens of such machines in an office environment (especially in an office building with lots of small individual tenants who won't want to coordinate bandwidth use)... You're taking up valuable radio spectrum just to avoid using a 9' cable? That's ludicrous.
Do you guys read the news _at_ _all_? This has been going around for ages. Catch is the "smart display" is basically a crippled webpad and costs as much so whats the point? Plus it won't work with XP home apparently.
Could be neat, with inkwell and photoshop and all..
..Touch screens severely limits the life span of the device, especially in a high use area. Unless they can make it a 'cost neutral' (gotta love my PCease eh) option I don't see it getting adopted any time soon. The corporate desktop market is VERY TIGHT $$ wise. The industry standard is 3 years of use I believe, and to get that from a touch screen seems a bit optimistic to say the least.
errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
They showed these devices at Computex in Taipei. That was some 3 or so months ago. The drawbacks to these devices is that you're not going to easily stream multimedia content, etc. to them- you're using a Citrix type framebuffer protocol. As a surfing device, it might be okay, but you're better off using something like a web pad or a tablet PC.
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
They could install one of these PCs in a Toilet with some Smart Displays. And then every time you need to do "stuffs" you could do readding slashdot or you favorite on-lin e newspaper for free! Is it not beautifull?
Yeah it is.
It's 2002, and Microsoft has re-invented VNC. Not bad: this time it took them less than a decade to copy someone else's idea; usually, it takes them several decades.
What's wrong with being a member of the National Association of Male Bashing Lesbian Anti-christs?
Coax or RCA connectors are so expensive. I have to have this thing because I want to expose myself to even more radiation than now. Seriously. . . why do we need this stuff? Just because it is wireless? Given the non-secure nature of such a system, one wonders what prompts people to need this device. I guess some people just have too much money to burn.
"Smart Display" is the 21st century market-speak version of what used to be called the "dumb terminal". Mind you, it's not a bad idea, but it's neither new nor earthshaking.
Microsoft: Yesterday's technology, tomorrow!
Proud member of the Weirdo-American community.
Why not embed Linux and the XFree86 XServer on this wireless PC( I mean innovative display system ) and have xdm running on the beige box under the desk?
Wow, a remote display! How revolutionary!
Then where are all the Linux displays that work this way?
If you want a taste of this then get a Sharp Zaurus, a WiFi card and install the XServer on it. You don't have the realestate of a 1028x768 [sic] display but the idea is the same.
So you're saying it's not the same. And even at 1024x768, I wonder how X would compare to Microsoft RDP? (Which I've used over a fairly slow connection with AWESOME results.)
Boy, this Microsoft thing is pure genius. NOT.
It doesn't need to be pure genious. It just needs to work well and be marketed correctly. I think Microsoft might be able to do that?
"And like that
exactly. ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny.
tcboo
Could be a VNC station after we redo the firmware..
---- Booth was a patriot ----
If this were to have been announced as a wireless X-Terminal, you'd be slobbering over it.
Hmmm. 15 years ago we had X terminals. Now M$ comes up with a wireless X terminal (which does XP rather than X). Why, it's almost as good as the WebPad products from two years ago. Oh, wait, it IS a WebPad! Again, the M$ innovation is that they are the ones who get the money.
There are two kinds of societies: sustainable and doomed.
if other posters are correct, it's been done already, by other companies.
and, I could do it myself. Just slap a WiFi card into my laptop, connect to an Xserver on another machine, and BAM! a remote display. Yes, it requires a second machine, but what geek doesn't have one or more machines? This basically sounds like one step removed from that scenario, kind of like VNC on a thin display over WiFi. All just some minor hardware tweaks. Not earth-shattering news.
and, more importantly, it will be implemented by Microsoft, w/ their not-so-glorious security record. which means that I could probably buy one of these things, spend a day or two tweaking it and googling, and be able to walk into any corporate building and get a display/login on someone's machine. And since this kind of toy will probably only be used by managment, I'll be able to get all kinds of nifty stuff ( because they undoubtably knocked out their security so they could do this or that nifty shiny feature )...information warfare...
PC moderators can suck my White pierced, tattooed dick. If you think pride == hate, s/dick/Aryan meat mallet/g.
Now my 2.4 GHz phone can cut out my GF's Airport and screw up my PC's display with a single call from my drunky buddy.
absolutely. sic transit gloria.
MS wants this because it would require an XP license on each computer as well as a WinCE license on each "mira" device while not working with any other type of system.
Just say no and run TightVNC on a cheap webpad under your favorite free OS.
an amd k6-2 300 sits in my livingroom with a crappy video capture card set to full screen as my tv. i also run VNC on it (so i can access kazaa, windows IE, ect from my mac). it's fun to watch the computer transmit video full screen every half second :)
moox. for a new generation.
We will have a device without a monitor communicating with another device, which has a monitor.
Woot !!
15" wireless screen for $1299....plus whatever you pay for the box running Windows....just get a friggin' laptop w/ a wireless network card. And, what's the battery life on one of these gonna be anyways? My guess: shitty.
I can see it now. Multicast the keystrokes to do a shutdown, wide open RW access to the C drive, etc.
Seriously though, this is silly. If you want remote monitors, just run remote desktop software which Would be of some use for tablet-PCs's. You take your tablet with you to a meeting and can access a spreadsheet currently open on your office machine. Now beaming from your tablet to a projector (or other tablets in the meeting) might be of some use (bluetooth would be best here), but to another desktop monitor? Silly.
This seems like an easy way to introduce digital rights management between the CPU and the display: tell the consumer that DRM will make his devices more secure.
Honesty. Loyalty. Kindness. Laughter. Generosity. Magic!
I've got a Windows XP system and a Jornada 728 which runs Hanheld PC 2000 OS (a buggy, rehashed version of Windows CE). Using the terminal server client, I can connect to my Windows machine through my wireless Type II PC card and operate it from my very thin client. The stylus is the mouse, just like the machine in this story. The only problem is the screen on the Jornada 728 is very short (about 240 pixels or so) and not wide (about 640 pixesl or so). I have to scroll around a lot. But what's really great about the Jornada is that it has a keyboard, too. I run any application on the PC through the Jornada. It's cool and I think this product will be a success. In fact, I'm writing this post on the Jornada over my wireless connection!
<a href="http://www.joblessjimmy.com">Work is dumb and so is Jobless Jimmy.</a>
X works fine at a megabit per second or more and it works perfectly over IEEE802.11b.
No! The SunRays are really quite slow. Not at all much faster than running encrypted X over my DSL line at home to the server at work. X11 have some problems that make it less than optimal as a SunRay protocol, but it's not about speed, and it's nothing that couldn't be fixed, really. I'd say the reason has something to do with the "advantages" of a proprietary protocol.
Try streaming multimedia or doing a DirectX game over the Windows remote session. Not going to happen, is it? Try doing something sophisticated like operating a CAD program over the link- that's going to be "fun". It's not undoable, but the effort and wasted time is much larger over a network session than a local console. It's why companies usually got someone a workstation instead of an X terminal when they were doing CAD work.
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
Hurrah! A breakthrough! Microsoft invents the X terminal!
-----sharks
Or classrooms. Wow. No more cramming. Just switch over the the class Poindexter and get the right answer.
Oh, wait! I know! Let's use these at the office of father^h^h^h^h^h^h homeland security! Now theres no way to trace who's looking up your data for personal gain!
No, I'm not bitter.
Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.
Ahh! I;ve got to stop myself before I say something else nice about a Microsoft product! Windows is actually usef--*Blam*
now I can wander around my house on a web pad.
I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
First winmodems now winscreens
Just as useful as a cheap old laptop running X and with a WiFi card. Except it can't do anything on it's own.
Well, I'm glad the monopoly hasn't stifled innovation in the PC world.
It seems MS weenies often cite X being client-server as a weakness of Linux, and now Microsoft is going the client-server display route themselves! No doubt they're touting this as some radical new architecture. Yawn.
if they were really smart displays they will avoid Microsoft at all and run to save their life...
With this news, a wireless display for windows XP only, and the new MS tables PCs, now I suddenly realize what steve meant a couple of weeks ago with outsmarting Linux.
Of course... It will work only until the porting projects get underway...
--- Hindsight is 20/20, but walking backwards is not the answer.
Seriously, it looks someones just misunderstood what a tablet PC is. Ooooor... More likely nobodies read the article.
how is this different from using a small machine with a minimal OS and a VNC client connected to some machine with VNC server running? Such a terminal will allow accessing any machine (not just PC running XP). Well may be it has SSL style authentication (the number 1 drawback of VNC in my opinion). MS seems to be desparate in expanding in non-pc software: XBox, Tablet PC, Pocket PC, etc...
Wow, it's been a while since I've worked a crappy retail position, so I did not think of that.
Anything that runs winCE can run free software. Just wait and the exact same hardware will be available with reasonable non propriatory crap on them. I'm sorry to hear that your current set up is such a pain. I advise you to look further than M$ for solutions. There are plenty of fine low footprint systems out there that have nothing to do with M$ and therefore are not a pain to use.
My guess is that MS ... caters to people with an average IQ equal to that of a doorknob.
That's the kind of disrespect M$ is known for. They think they are so clever. I predict XBox like losses.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
Against all reason, I really hope that these devices don't speak RDP. RDP is a -classic- example of MSFTs embrace and extend tactics. Essentially, RDP is based on a suite of international standards protocols (ITU T.128 being the topmost layer) with one little twist; between the T.128 layer (the desktop sharing) and the T.124(? I think.. It's MCS (multipoint communication service), essentially the base protocol for netmeeting) layers there is a security layer that is not documented, requiring signing an agreement w/ MSFT (beyond the standard click-through licensing) to get information on.
Interestingly enough, there DOES exist a free client for RDP, but no server. Why is this? Official MSFT servers are willing to let clients ignore the security layer & skip initialization of it. The official MSFT clients, OTOH, will refuse to connect to a server that doesn't properly support the encryption layer.
In short, there's a snowball's chance in hell of these things ever working with anything other than Windows, short of physically hacking the machines and making Xterms out of them.
my sig's at the bottom of the page.
What keeps, say, you neighbor from "tuning in" your monitor and having a peek at your PC activities?
Or the Police? The FBI/CIA/RCMP/RIAA/(insert-alphabet-name-here)?
Just curious.
Spèaking about stereotypes, doesn't "screen name" make you sound like an AOL user?
__
Men with no respect for life must never be allowed to control the ultimate instruments of death.
GW Bu
The barrier is largely on the hardware side.
It's easy to have open source software, and not
so easy to have our community make hardware like
this. As for your comparison between X and
RDP, I too would be interested in speed comparisons.
For every problem, there is at least one solution that is simple, neat, and wrong.
To the best of my knowledge, that bit about the API calls is incorrect. Remote Desktop (gotta love Microsoft's way of turning common terminology into product names) uses the RDP 5.1 protocol, an incremental update to RDP 5.0, the remote display protocol used by Windows Terminal Service in Windows 2000. Version 5.1 adds some goodies like an audio channel, a serial channel, and better compression, but it's still basically a remote display protocol like RFB, ICA, or AIP.
Check out this link for old, surplus versions.
t .a sp?ProductID=MIS-ZCRUIS
http://www.computersurplusoutlet.com/viewproduc
Once again MS is pushing the boundaries of security.... in the wrong direction. Now not only the government, but anyone with a receiver can view what you are doing. Is it just me, or can anyone else feel "Big Brother's" eyes opening a little wider?
I'm a happy pessimist. I expect and prepare for the worst, when it doesn't happen I am pleasantly surprised.
What's the point if most managers want to control where you are in meatspace - most don't want you to telecommute, and some hit the roof if they can't find you during *lunchtime*, for Pete's sake...why would they pay for something that lets their workers roam?
Now when Win Xtra Pathetic pukes, the power button won't even be handy!
Say...why not combine this with a wireless keyboard and wireless mouse! Then you could compute anywhere in your house! And hey...what if we put a small hard disk in, and added a CPU...then we wouldn't need the wireless connection to the PC!
It is to laugh. 'round abouts ten years ago or so, Pen Computing magazine was reporting on the various pen interface products, and one from Zenith was a tablet computer. You added a card to your computer, and it broadcast your desktop to a touch screen terminal that had an onscreen keyboard and a pen to replace the monitor. Glad to hear that Microsoft is still creating cutting edge products... Not.
Wogs "Freedom's just another word for having nothing left to lose."
Ah, because "fully functional computer" is washy-washey, and "half a computer with an 802.11b card and a monitor" is really rugged and well thought out!
Woah! You mean I can get ascii characters to go THROUGH the AIR? Paying only $1500 to MS, instead of $1098 to Apple? And I can not get a fully functional processor, OS, or keyboard? And all without all those annoying USB, firewire, and other assorted ports? Cool!
Ah. Funny, I've tried this using current protocols over a link which had an uncapped cable modem as its bottleneck. My magnificent framerate of
Hmm...600x1500=$900,000. Jeeze, that looks like the salary for the other 8 professors needed to cut the class down to under 70 students to me. But then again, that solution provides better teaching with more feedback, less overworked teachers, and a need for a smaller room which doesn't need to be specificly wired, whereas your solution provides the warm glow of donating $900k to MS.
And I've been using email, instant messaging, or a phone for that all this time! Hallelujah!
I'd provide a cynical, semi-humorous comment on this if it made sense based on the grammar of any of the three languages I speak. It's times like this I wish I knew Japanese!
Hmm...I spent a decent amount on my newest router. Linksys D-link, 4 10/100bT ports plus 2.4 ghz 802.11b. Typing this from my G4/400 desktop, but my G3/500 iBook is also happily connected. Even down the hall! Wow! The technology of tomorrow, 8 months ago!
Yes, my favorite distro (OSX) is actually kinda likely to get one of these (Apple is pretty gung-ho on such things). Will I buy it? Well...between that and the iBooks that are available then...hmm...Such a tough decision! Better input methods, more functional machine, and more functional networking/peripherals, or have the latest iDevice. Sorry, I'll just have to wait to see the specs, I guess!
via their 'wearable' PC.
F 07 LZ5ZY.HTM
Nice and semi-rugged too, so it'll cope with a small drop from desk etc...
http://www.panasonic.co.uk/product/wearablepc/C
Niggers and computer equipment? WTF are you smoking?
Comment removed based on user account deletion
But honestly, it may not be called VNC, but it produces the same effect and fits the basic definition.
Yes and no. Proprietary thin-clients do nothing but promote the feared 'vendor lock-in'. Look at the current crop of thin-clients, a vast majority (essentially anything that is not marketed as an X-term) of all but the most expensive models are limited to RDP and ICA (Citrix's protocol). RDP is 100% Microsoft, ICA provides expensive client/server licences based on Win32 & several commercial unices (Sun, HP, IBM...), neither will likely ever be supported under a free OS, since MSFT, having invested large sums of money in them. has a considerable influence over the decisions made by Citrix.
Most businesses, unless they are specifically looking for interoperability with non-MSFT systems, are going to look beyond that initial purchase price, ignoring the fact that they've essentially purchased a whole office/lab full of hardware that is essentially Windows-only. Where PCs could potentially be converted to a Linux/BSD system, if the desire ever arises, without doing anything more than replacing an OS, these windows only terminals become garbage if an enterprise wishes to move away from Windows.
If this new hardware comes out, it'll be much the same story; another case of MSFT taking open protocols and using their market strength (and customer momentum) to manipulate the standards in such a way that they are no longer open & interoperable, further building the stranglehold they have on the computing industry.
Just think what will happen if MSFT gets their way and manages to get their secure computing platform crap on the market...
my sig's at the bottom of the page.
All I hear is talk of resolution and bandwidth. I thought you people are supposed to be smart.
Have any of you ever though of the notion that maybe the tablet is the one doing the windowing? That the only thing being shuttled back and forth between the tablet and PC is the data the application is using? Hmmmmmm?
Geeze. No wonder the PC industry is so stale and boring. Nobody has any imagination.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
My only problem with your suggestion is that it's a "touch screeN"
When modding "Informative", please make sure it both has a source and IS actually informative.
Somebody bought a bad POS system.
So, um, you have a seperate line for each Till, or can only one clerk do a CC transaction at a time? Why all the duplication?And 3-5 years later Linux will catch up. Too little, too late as always.
Wow! They just invented the wireless X-terminal! I'm amazed...
You dont transfer every pixel. You simply transfer coordinates for windows and contents such as text. Streaming video would be like streaming over any other wirless network. It works with some simple compression.
Also as for security you could simply have a narrow antennea so they sniffers will have trouble picking it up.
unzip; strip; touch; finger; mount; fsck; more; yes; unmount; sleep
Still I prefer that over software that is released before the major gaping security holes have been taken out. Security hole of the week... License change of the month. Cost increase of the year. New enlarged start button wooptydoo.
--- Hindsight is 20/20, but walking backwards is not the answer.
Arnold's Laws of Documentation:
(1) If it should exist, it doesn't.
(2) If it does exist, it's out of date.
(3) Only documentation for useless programs transcends the
first two laws.
- this post brought to you by the Automated Last Post Generator...