Posted by
michael
on from the double-your-pleasure dept.
cojsl writes "Anandtech reviews the Jetway Magic Twin small form-factor PC that allows two simultaneous users on one Windows PC. The article mentions a mobo only option too."
SImpson's did it!
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 4, Funny
I mean UNIX did it!
But how well does it handle FPS games?
by
Seng
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
I'm guessing not real well...
Re:But how well does it handle FPS games?
by
Spleener12
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Depends on the card, the processor, and the game, I'd guess. You'd basically be doubling the load on both the video card and the processor. I can see Quake3 running just fine regardless, but a newer game might have some problems. I doubt that they're going for the hardcore gamer demographic with this concept, though.
Wondering about licensing and grammar
by
The+I+Shing
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
I wonder how licensing will work for software installed on such a computer.
Will software makers insist that multiple licenses be bought for software that will be used by two users simultaneously?
And speaking of things being equal, I feel a Grammar Raid coming on...
"Magic Twin looks like a pretty unique solution..." the article says. Why do people insist on qualifying the word unique? Something is either unique or it isn't. An object cannot be "somewhat unique" or "almost totally unique." The word means one of a kind, and without equal. Something either has equals or it doesn't.
Grammar Slammer Bammer slam Igor tomorrow, for sure!
-- You are in error. No-one is screaming. Thank you for your cooperation.
Re:Wondering about licensing and grammar
by
Mr.+Bad+Example
·
· Score: 5, Funny
> An object cannot be "somewhat unique" or "almost totally unique." The word means one of a kind, and without equal. Something either has equals or it doesn't.
That's the most perfect description of a superlative I've ever seen.
Re:Wondering about licensing and grammar
by
pla
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
I wonder how licensing will work for
software installed on such a computer.
For a better question, I wonder if anyone
(other than Microsoft) will care.
Not a troll or flamebait - Really, how many
home users actually went out and bought
Windows or Office? For a business, a few
hundred bucks might not mean much (particularly
in comparison with getting caught running an
unlicensed app). For a home user, many people
balk at even paying $50 for their tax
software, nevermind something as mundane as
a word processor and spreadsheet (and the
rest, that I have yet to see anyone use
outside a work environment).
People get Windows with their machines. They
get Office from a friend or borrow the install
CD from work. Legality simply doesn't matter,
end of story.
Or, for an already-common analogy, how many
people paid extra fees to use on a dual-CPU
box (most commercial software includes provisions
limiting its use to on a per-CPU basis as well)?
Answer? No one. Even businesses usually
overlook that one, for "mere" duals.
Watch out for the licensing issues here
by
Amiga+Lover
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
from the review the units abilities"
1 PC can be used by 2 users at the same time
2 users can browse the internet, send and receive email at the same time
2 users can access all software installed on the PC at the same time (Excel, Word, PowerPoint, Data Base, games, etc.)
2 users can play games against each other with a dual-port VGA card
I know many softwares of mine have claims that only one person may use it on one machine at one time. What does this mean? If two Excels are loaded on the same machine at the same time where is the licensing happening? No check over network will find any but it's own self running when really it's running for another user anyway on the same machine and that would still end up being a violation of the licensing of a product.
MS would not be amused.
Ready for the jokes?
by
eric76
·
· Score: 4, Funny
How about the blonde who had one of these with a KVM switch to handle both screens?
Happens all the time where I work
by
Neil+Blender
·
· Score: 3, Funny
The user of the windows box and the admin trying to fix it working together as one. I see it everyday.
Taking a step back?
by
mizidymizark
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
Is it me, or is this returning to the days of dumb terminals? I think this is practical for some of the suggestions they had, ie. 2 children doing homework, but this is hardly a revolutionary idea.
Well, minus multiplied with minus becomes a positive. So I guess it would cancel out. On the other hand, Windows would probably BSOD when trying to multiply something. So, we get (--)-, which is -. A BSOD. Now, if the bluescreen subroutine (known internally in microsoft as "void releaseDateFixer(void)") also BSODs, you would be back in the graphical interface again. To crash the BSOD routine, you would probably need to do something as cruel as... plugging in a new printer or something.
-- Roses are #FF0000, violets are #0000FF, all my base are belong to you
These have been around for some time
by
spidergoat2
·
· Score: 3, Informative
These are nothing new. The PCBuddy has been around for a number of years. We don't pay much attention to this stuff in the USA because PC's and parts are cheap. These devices are popular in third world countries where resources are streched.
the PC model is kind of really not that good of an idea, all things concidered. I am sure those of who are network admins or some such at companies know that individual PCs on the desks of the employees is headache central. Why not take the terminal server model into the homes? There would need to be only one machine, it could sit in the closet w/ the cable modem or whatever, out of the way. Perhaps with a CD changer or virtual disk mirrors to keep it from really needing to be accessed. Then there could be wireless heads around the house, one for each member of the family, say. Then everyone can use the computer at the same time and need only one copy of the OS, anti-virus, et cetera. It'd be a lot neater to handle.
Does the hard drive look seperate for each user? Or are they piggy-backing onto the Fast User Switching / Built-in Terminal Server feature of XP to provide user seperation?
The article is _light_ on detail for a five page pseudo-advertisement.
Fuck.
-- Fuck Beta. Fuck Dice
Unique? No... but legal questions?
by
NitroWolf
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
It's not unique. This has been around for more than a decade. I remember an add on card for sale in CompUSA that allowed this exact thing.
I never bought one, because I never had a need. But this is no unique, in so far as allowing to people to use the same box via a mouse and keyboard. It's kinda nice to see this functionality updated, but it's certianly not unique.
However, it leads to some legal question for software licenses.
Most EULA's say you can run "One instance of the software on ONE machine at a time" - how does this apply to this machine? If you run two instances of a software package on the same machine, are you in violation of the EULA? My gut reation is yes... but will they really care?
Depends. If it's not popular, this obviously won't be inforced, but if this is something that becomes more popular, will we start to see software that won't let you run multiple instances of it at once?
The article says you can play head to head VGA games against each other... but how does that work if you're only running one instance, or are you running two instances?
This just doesn't seem all that practical for game playing. For productivity apps, though, this could be killer for cube rats. IT could deploy one machine for two cubes, cutting your hardware budget, and support in half!
Lots of questions, both technical and legal need to be worked out before this could really take off. Couple that with the fact that previous attempts at this didn't seem to fly, for whatever reason, it makes me wonder if this isn't already a dead technology.
Re:Unique? No... but legal questions?
by
Carl+T
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
For productivity apps, though, this could be killer for cube rats. IT could deploy one machine for two cubes, cutting your hardware budget, and support in half!
Hardware budget in half? Not if you still need two screens and two sets of input devices. And the computer itself will be more expensive than a normal one, so the gain would be less than the cost of a single machine.
As for support... well, software support is what costs money, or so I believe. It comes down to whether it's proportional to the number of machines or how much they're used. My guess would be mostly the latter if we're talking about MS Windows, and then there's little to gain here. It could even be that sharing a machine like this brings about trouble of its own. Ditto for hardware. But what's most worrying from a business point of view is that every time one person's computer is down, so is another's. Potentially doubling downtime to save maybe $200 (a wild guess, admittedly) per person per three years doesn't sound like a good idea to me.
--
This signature is not in the public domain.
Re:Unique? No... but legal questions?
by
Myself
·
· Score: 3, Informative
Yeah, it was called the Buddy, and the old incarnation sucked. It was a PCI board which was essentially a video card plus a PS/2 keyboard and mouse controller. The video capabilities were terrible (sync rate limited to 60Hz, IIRC), and the second keyboard was prone to random resets and other problems.
The new incarnation of Buddy seems to address all those problems by using standard hardware. Buddy and BeTwin (they look like the same software) appear to work with any PCI video board that'll coexist with other video hardware, and since they use USB keyboards and mice (and audio, if you want), the proprietary controller problems should be gone too.
The new Buddy doesn't stop at 2 stations, either. It'll happily run up to 5, which might have a chance of using some of the absurd CPU power available in a modern PC. They have a trial version up for download, I might have to check my hardware compatibility and tinker with it later.
Two blue screens of death for the price of one...
by
SmackCrackandPot
·
· Score: 3, Funny
... that's got to be a bargain!
Re:I want the opposite...
by
esac17
·
· Score: 3, Informative
That problem is easily answered when considering 1 or 2 computers run off one interface (VNC, TS, telnet, ssh). But the problem comes when one wants to manage their whole lab infrastructure or every computer in their home from one interface. Windows 2003 comes with a neat little MMC snapin called "Remote Desktops" that lets you manage all of your TS sessions. The problem with that is that there is one process for each computer, and if you can imagine, 100-1000 mstsc.exe processes can consume quite a bit of memory. As well it doesn't support features that KVM does like being able to broadcast to all of the machines at once.
What would be nice is software that lets you split your computers into groups, allow you to broadcast to those specific groups, etc..
Re:Terminal Server
by
w3weasel
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
sadly, this is a kludge... specialized motherboard required... meaning the MoBo is actually siamese twins sharing non-critical chips (err.. organs).
--
Just as irrigation is the lifeblood of the Southwest, lifeblood is the soup of cannibals. -- Jack Handy
this wasn't a review
by
bmajik
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
this was an ad.
not a single thing was said about how it works. How does the 2nd keyboard direct its keystrokes to the 2nd display ? Is the 2nd display an RDP client, or is it a 2nd monitor of window session 0 ? Are the two users running as different XP logins ? what does the magic twin software do ? new keyboard driver ? new mouse driver ? new audio driver ?
Without knowing how this thing works, it's a non article.
-- My opinions are my own, and do not necessarily represent those of my employer.
More information plus pricing
by
erick99
·
· Score: 5, Informative
This website does a pretty good job explaining the technology involved and also provides some pricing.
Happy Trails!
Erick
-- http://www.busyweather.com/
Re:On (U|Li)n[iu]x
by
stonedyak
·
· Score: 3, Funny
Linx? Uniux? Those aren't operating systems. You're just making this up now!
The Mainframe is BACK!
by
code+addict
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
Am I the only one that thinks this sounds like a mini version of a mainframe w/terminals? Maybe that's the next trend in computing, one PC per household, with multiple terminals for each family member!
First we have unix on mainframes, then Windows on PCs, and now we're moving back to Unix on mainframes again...;)
could developers....
by
zogger
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
..use this? Be compiling and what not on one side, running the compiled code or working on writing on the other? Seems like one practical use. Or having one of the sides be for casually being on the net, while the other side is more open in admin mode for working, or are they both as vulnerable?
no, didn't RTA.
Also via a PCI card
by
phoebe
·
· Score: 5, Informative
Applica have been doing this for a bit, they also sell 4-station cards so that 5 users can share one PC!
Re:Terminal Server
by
pseudochaotic
·
· Score: 5, Funny
It's not IMPOSSIBLE to do, but I'm interested to see how they did it.
Yeah. Wouldn't it be great if slashdot linked to an article or something?
-- And the l33t shall inherit the 34r7h.
Install guide has some more details...
by
morcheeba
·
· Score: 3, Informative
We can only guarantee that the program will properly run on a completely reinstalled Windows XP system, using the latest hardware drivers and system requirements,
without third-party software and hardware.
.. so as long as you don't try to run any applications on it, you'll be fine! The software is fully tied to Windows XP, so no chance of running other operating systems. It looks like there is only one copy of Windows XP running, but then Page 13 has this quote:
Microsoft Windows License Request: After you have read and accept the Microsoft license terms, the MagicTwin software will explicitly ask you, the licensee, whether you have obtained a sufficient number of Windows licenses. If your choice is "NO" then at every restart the software will notify you of this issue.
Page 8 tells you to turn off the system standby in XP's power management. Guess they don't have that working well. But they do warn the second user if the first user decides to shut down the system.
There are already a few misguided posts on the matter so hopefully, I can clear this up for you.
Microsoft and many other software makers already address this licensing issue. On this machine Microsoft requires either two licenses for Windows or one Windows license and a Terminal Server Client Access license. For MS Office a license is required for each per seat instance. SO, two users in Word requires two licenses.
This same licensing system is also required by many/most other commercial vendors. Anyone familiar with Terminal services or Citrix should be familiar with this licensing model. If they aren't Microsoft will enjoy speaking with them.
Re:should possible on any PC with sufficient hardw
by
Qwell
·
· Score: 5, Informative
Not a whole lot keeps two X servers from running locally. I saw this howto at tldp.org a few months ago, and was very interested. It requires a kernel patch or two, but it seems very nice. http://tldp.org/HOWTO/XFree-Local-multi-user-HOWTO/
I thought with the usual Microsoft security holes that Windows users already had people sharing their PC.
Yes! that's my 100th attempt at Karma whoring! Thank you, thank you!
--
the major advances in civilization are processes which all but wreck the societies in which they occur - A.N. White
Re:Terminal Server
by
sampowers
·
· Score: 3, Funny
Yeah, I sure do wish Linux could do that! We're always playing catch-up with Microsoft!
Re:Terminal Server
by
kimgh
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
I have Win XP Pro, and, while 2 users can be logged in at one time (one at the console, the other over a network), they both cannot be working at the same time.
I don't call that "truly multi-user."
By contrast, my Mac, running OS X, is truly multi-user: I can connect to it over the network while someone else is at the console, and we both can do stuff.
But that's just how Microsoft chose to license it (XP workstation). There is nothing inherent in the OS, that prevents them from working in parallel. In fact, NT Servers (XP and 2000) allow multiple people to login. I'm using Remote Desktop right now to access one from my FreeBSD box.
Also, rumors are, the limit on the number of simultamious users can be increased by careful editing of the registry, but I can not find the link right now...
-- In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
Re:Terminal Server
by
dnamaners
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Looks like as noted above that this is a softwear & XP trick, and not actually directly related their pc in particular. They specify that it needs their proprietary softwear, a 2 head VGA card and a mouse and keyboard splitter. Id bet they rout the input of 1 set of devices to each user and controll XP login with it.
Sort of neat but to me it seems like a bit of a curiosity rather than a true tool. I'd place it on par with neato bundled remotes and LCD panels on some boxes. That sort of candy can be darn usefull for a few but is not on the "needs" list form most users. Maybe this product would do better as an optional upgrade package for use with any PC.
Re:Terminal Server
by
Malc
·
· Score: 4, Informative
bhtooefr is correct. There can be only one person connected whether it be at the console or via RDP. Logging on via RDP disconnects everybody else and connects to an existing desktop if that user has already logged in. Logging on at the console will then disconnect that remote user, and connect to the same session if it is the same username.
I wish there were a way to hack XP's terminal services to allow multiple concurrent logons.
I already did the same thing with plain old X-windows on a linux *LAPTOP*. Windows is so behind the times. (With X, you can define the two outputs of the video card (VGA out and the LCD screen) to be different screens altogether, and define one to use the laptop's keyboard and laptop's touchpad, and the other to use a usb keyboard and mouse, and violla, localhost:1.0 is user 1 on the laptop, and localhost:2.0 is user 2 using the usb keyboard, mouse, and the external VGA monitor.)
--
Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.
Slashdot Mirror
I mean UNIX did it!
I'm guessing not real well...
I wonder how licensing will work for software installed on such a computer.
Will software makers insist that multiple licenses be bought for software that will be used by two users simultaneously?
And speaking of things being equal, I feel a Grammar Raid coming on...
"Magic Twin looks like a pretty unique solution..." the article says. Why do people insist on qualifying the word unique? Something is either unique or it isn't. An object cannot be "somewhat unique" or "almost totally unique." The word means one of a kind, and without equal. Something either has equals or it doesn't.
Grammar Slammer Bammer slam Igor tomorrow, for sure!
You are in error. No-one is screaming. Thank you for your cooperation.
from the review the units abilities"
1 PC can be used by 2 users at the same time
2 users can browse the internet, send and receive email at the same time
2 users can access all software installed on the PC at the same time (Excel, Word, PowerPoint, Data Base, games, etc.)
2 users can play games against each other with a dual-port VGA card
I know many softwares of mine have claims that only one person may use it on one machine at one time. What does this mean? If two Excels are loaded on the same machine at the same time where is the licensing happening? No check over network will find any but it's own self running when really it's running for another user anyway on the same machine and that would still end up being a violation of the licensing of a product.
MS would not be amused.
How about the blonde who had one of these with a KVM switch to handle both screens?
The user of the windows box and the admin trying to fix it working together as one. I see it everyday.
Is it me, or is this returning to the days of dumb terminals? I think this is practical for some of the suggestions they had, ie. 2 children doing homework, but this is hardly a revolutionary idea.
What's it mean when there is an advertisment for the box being reviewed right beside the review?...
I do security
How will it know which virus to run first?
Slashdot sucks
what happends when you BSOD twice? Do they cancel each other out and the computer works again?
Your hair look like poop, Bob! - Wanker.
These are nothing new. The PCBuddy has been around for a number of years. We don't pay much attention to this stuff in the USA because PC's and parts are cheap. These devices are popular in third world countries where resources are streched.
the PC model is kind of really not that good of an idea, all things concidered. I am sure those of who are network admins or some such at companies know that individual PCs on the desks of the employees is headache central.
Why not take the terminal server model into the homes? There would need to be only one machine, it could sit in the closet w/ the cable modem or whatever, out of the way. Perhaps with a CD changer or virtual disk mirrors to keep it from really needing to be accessed. Then there could be wireless heads around the house, one for each member of the family, say. Then everyone can use the computer at the same time and need only one copy of the OS, anti-virus, et cetera. It'd be a lot neater to handle.
Does the hard drive look seperate for each user? Or are they piggy-backing onto the Fast User Switching / Built-in Terminal Server feature of XP to provide user seperation?
The article is _light_ on detail for a five page pseudo-advertisement.
Fuck.
Fuck Beta. Fuck Dice
It's not unique. This has been around for more than a decade. I remember an add on card for sale in CompUSA that allowed this exact thing.
I never bought one, because I never had a need. But this is no unique, in so far as allowing to people to use the same box via a mouse and keyboard. It's kinda nice to see this functionality updated, but it's certianly not unique.
However, it leads to some legal question for software licenses.
Most EULA's say you can run "One instance of the software on ONE machine at a time" - how does this apply to this machine? If you run two instances of a software package on the same machine, are you in violation of the EULA? My gut reation is yes... but will they really care?
Depends. If it's not popular, this obviously won't be inforced, but if this is something that becomes more popular, will we start to see software that won't let you run multiple instances of it at once?
The article says you can play head to head VGA games against each other... but how does that work if you're only running one instance, or are you running two instances?
This just doesn't seem all that practical for game playing. For productivity apps, though, this could be killer for cube rats. IT could deploy one machine for two cubes, cutting your hardware budget, and support in half!
Lots of questions, both technical and legal need to be worked out before this could really take off. Couple that with the fact that previous attempts at this didn't seem to fly, for whatever reason, it makes me wonder if this isn't already a dead technology.
... that's got to be a bargain!
That problem is easily answered when considering 1 or 2 computers run off one interface (VNC, TS, telnet, ssh). But the problem comes when one wants to manage their whole lab infrastructure or every computer in their home from one interface. Windows 2003 comes with a neat little MMC snapin called "Remote Desktops" that lets you manage all of your TS sessions. The problem with that is that there is one process for each computer, and if you can imagine, 100-1000 mstsc.exe processes can consume quite a bit of memory. As well it doesn't support features that KVM does like being able to broadcast to all of the machines at once.
What would be nice is software that lets you split your computers into groups, allow you to broadcast to those specific groups, etc..
sadly, this is a kludge... specialized motherboard required... meaning the MoBo is actually siamese twins sharing non-critical chips (err.. organs).
Just as irrigation is the lifeblood of the Southwest, lifeblood is the soup of cannibals. -- Jack Handy
this was an ad.
not a single thing was said about how it works. How does the 2nd keyboard direct its keystrokes to the 2nd display ? Is the 2nd display an RDP client, or is it a 2nd monitor of window session 0 ? Are the two users running as different XP logins ? what does the magic twin software do ? new keyboard driver ? new mouse driver ? new audio driver ?
Without knowing how this thing works, it's a non article.
My opinions are my own, and do not necessarily represent those of my employer.
Happy Trails!
Erick
http://www.busyweather.com/
Linx? Uniux? Those aren't operating systems. You're just making this up now!
Am I the only one that thinks this sounds like a mini version of a mainframe w/terminals? Maybe that's the next trend in computing, one PC per household, with multiple terminals for each family member!
;)
First we have unix on mainframes, then Windows on PCs, and now we're moving back to Unix on mainframes again...
..use this? Be compiling and what not on one side, running the compiled code or working on writing on the other? Seems like one practical use. Or having one of the sides be for casually being on the net, while the other side is more open in admin mode for working, or are they both as vulnerable?
no, didn't RTA.
Applica have been doing this for a bit, they also sell 4-station cards so that 5 users can share one PC!
It's not IMPOSSIBLE to do, but I'm interested to see how they did it.
Yeah. Wouldn't it be great if slashdot linked to an article or something?
And the l33t shall inherit the 34r7h.
Page 8 tells you to turn off the system standby in XP's power management. Guess they don't have that working well. But they do warn the second user if the first user decides to shut down the system.
HIV Crosses Species Barrier... into Muppets
There are already a few misguided posts on the matter so hopefully, I can clear this up for you.
Microsoft and many other software makers already address this licensing issue. On this machine Microsoft requires either two licenses for Windows or one Windows license and a Terminal Server Client Access license. For MS Office a license is required for each per seat instance. SO, two users in Word requires two licenses.
This same licensing system is also required by many/most other commercial vendors. Anyone familiar with Terminal services or Citrix should be familiar with this licensing model. If they aren't Microsoft will enjoy speaking with them.
Not a whole lot keeps two X servers from running locally. I saw this howto at tldp.org a few months ago, and was very interested. It requires a kernel patch or two, but it seems very nice.O /
http://tldp.org/HOWTO/XFree-Local-multi-user-HOWT
As of 10/06/03, I hate COBOL developers.
I thought with the usual Microsoft security holes that Windows users already had people sharing their PC.
Yes! that's my 100th attempt at Karma whoring! Thank you, thank you!
the major advances in civilization are processes which all but wreck the societies in which they occur - A.N. White
Yeah, I sure do wish Linux could do that! We're always playing catch-up with Microsoft!
I don't call that "truly multi-user."
By contrast, my Mac, running OS X, is truly multi-user: I can connect to it over the network while someone else is at the console, and we both can do stuff.
But that's just how Microsoft chose to license it (XP workstation). There is nothing inherent in the OS, that prevents them from working in parallel. In fact, NT Servers (XP and 2000) allow multiple people to login. I'm using Remote Desktop right now to access one from my FreeBSD box.
Also, rumors are, the limit on the number of simultamious users can be increased by careful editing of the registry, but I can not find the link right now...
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
Looks like as noted above that this is a softwear & XP trick, and not actually directly related their pc in particular. They specify that it needs their proprietary softwear, a 2 head VGA card and a mouse and keyboard splitter. Id bet they rout the input of 1 set of devices to each user and controll XP login with it.
Sort of neat but to me it seems like a bit of a curiosity rather than a true tool. I'd place it on par with neato bundled remotes and LCD panels on some boxes. That sort of candy can be darn usefull for a few but is not on the "needs" list form most users. Maybe this product would do better as an optional upgrade package for use with any PC.
bhtooefr is correct. There can be only one person connected whether it be at the console or via RDP. Logging on via RDP disconnects everybody else and connects to an existing desktop if that user has already logged in. Logging on at the console will then disconnect that remote user, and connect to the same session if it is the same username.
I wish there were a way to hack XP's terminal services to allow multiple concurrent logons.
I already did the same thing with plain old X-windows on a linux *LAPTOP*. Windows is so behind the times. (With X, you can define the two outputs of the video card (VGA out and the LCD screen) to be different screens altogether, and define one to use the laptop's keyboard and laptop's touchpad, and the other to use a usb keyboard and mouse, and violla, localhost:1.0 is user 1 on the laptop, and localhost:2.0 is user 2 using the usb keyboard, mouse, and the external VGA monitor.)
Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.