Ask Slashdot: Advanced KVM Switch?

jez9999 writes: I have a rather advanced use-case for my home work area that I need a KVM-type device for, and I was wondering whether such a thing even existed. I want a 3-PC setup; 2 desktops (PC1 and PC2) and 1 laptop going through a dock (DOCK1). I want to connect 2 monitors (SCREEN1 and SCREEN2), 1 mouse, and 1 keyboard (INPUTS). So far it's relatively straightforward, as I could just switch everything between the 3 devices.

But here's the kicker; I'd like at least 4 modes of operation: one mode to output PC1 video to both screens (dual-screen) and redirect INPUTS to it, one mode to output PC2 video to both screens (dual-screen) and redirect INPUTS to it, one mode to output PC1 video to SCREEN1, extend DOCK1 video to SCREEN2, and redirect INPUTS to DOCK1, and one mode to output PC1 video to SCREEN1, extend DOCK1 video to SCREEN2, and redirect INPUTS to PC1.

Basically with the latter two modes I'd like to be able to switch between inputting to PC1 & DOCK1, whilst continuing to be able to monitor each by outputting each one's video to one of the 2 monitors. However, I also want to be able to go dual-screen with and control PC1 & PC2.

In terms of ports I'd like to use HDMI (or possibly DVI-D) and USB for peripherals; not VGA or PS/2.

Is there any KVM switch out there able to do this kind of thing? I guess I'm probably looking for some kind of programmable KVM which allows me to specify, for each 'mode of operation', which inputs are routed to which outputs. Failing that, is there some other way I can get the setup I want (or something close)?

Comments

Matirx KVM Switch

[BenFranske]

What you want is called a matrix KVM switch. They exist, but they're quite expensive, do some Googling on matrix KVM switch and you'll see the options.

Re:Matirx KVM Switch

[BenFranske]

See the ATEN CM0264 for a specific example of what I think you're looking for.

Re:Matirx KVM Switch

[Qzukk]

You can also try searching for a "Multi-Console" KVM switch too. No, they're not cheap either.

Re:Matirx KVM Switch

[cdrudge]

A separate 3x2 or 4x2 HDMI matrix switch and USB switch would be significantly cheaper than a all-in-one solution. It would be a few extra button presses, but for the money saved it wouldn't be that bad.

Re: Matirx KVM Switch

[amxcoder]

This. Run video through a matrix HDMI switch, (4x2 or 4x4) will allow you to route the video any way you want, any input to any output. Then use a normal USB KVM for keyboard and mouse control.

Re:Matirx KVM Switch

[DarkKaplah]

BenFranske is correct. You're looking for a matrix switch for the video. They are sized by the number of video inputs and outputs. You're probably looking for a 6x2 ( inputs( pc1 screen 1, pc1 screen2, pc2 screen1, pc2 screen1, laptop screen1, laptop screen2) x outputs (screen 1, screen2). Remember these devices will not use a keyboard shortcut to direct sources to outputs. You'll either need to use the remote or rig something up with an arduino as most of these devices accept RS-232 commands that are fairly simple.
Something like this would work http://amzn.to/1L2pWmU

As for inputs such as keyboard and mouse that would be something different. I used a USB switch and a hub to create this solution, but now this type of gear exists.
http://amzn.to/1FB3dyd

I believe this would solve your issue. Your other choice would be to get two 4 port HDMI KVMs each hooked up to a monitor. You only need to hook a keyboard and mouse up to one (say screen 1's kvm). The issue here is you'll have to use the remote or buttons to trigger Screen2's KVM as you won't be able to use a keyboard shortcut where as you can on Screen1.

Hope this helps!

Re:Matirx KVM Switch

[KVM Guru]

That is super expensive, doing a quick search I found that ConnectPRO UDD-14A+ can do what he wants for about $500

Re: Matirx KVM Switch

[Anubis IV]

Completely agree with you, since that'll save a load of money and complexity headache. If he is, however, absolutely dead-set on a KVM and wants to avoid a matrix KVM, he should recognize that he really has three modes (i.e. one per computer), with PC1 having two modes (i.e. toggling between what's displayed on the second display). Doing so greatly simplifies things, since it lets you use a normal dual-screen KVM switch to control your inputs, then use a simple HDMI switch to toggle what's shown on your second display when controlling PC1.

A complete example setup might be:

PC1 SCREEN1 goes into an HDMI splitter, which goes to KVM Port 1 SCREEN1 and KVM Port 3 SCREEN1. I.e. For controlling both PC1 and DOCK1, you'll see PC1 SCREEN1 on your first display.

PC1 SCREEN2 goes into an HDMI switch, which then goes to KVM Port 1 SCREEN2.

PC2 gets hooked up like normal.

DOCK1 SCREEN1 goes into an HDMI splitter, which goes to KVM Port 3 SCREEN2, as well as the HDMI switch mentioned earlier. I.e. DOCK1's video will always be visible when controlling DOCK1, and will optionally be visible when controlling PC1.

Everything else hooks up like normal. At that point, he'd use the KVM switch to control which computer he's using, then would use the HDMI switch to toggle whether he sees PC1 or PC1/DOCK1 when controlling PC1.

That said, HDMI splitters are notoriously flaky, particularly if you go for the passive variety.

Is it worth doing this in hardware?

[damn_registrars]

You could use VNC, teamviewer, or anything along those lines to accomplish what you want without throwing additional hardware into the mix.

Re:Is it worth doing this in hardware?

[BenFranske]

Yes, except if you care about latency, etc. I'm assuming this user knows what they're talking about and has specifically requested a KVM for a reason. For example trying to do graphic design work, video editing, CAD, or a lot of other things over VNC or any screengrabber is not really feasible. Even just typing a word processing document is a bit of a pain with the lag...

Re:Is it worth doing this in hardware?

[DarkOx]

If the systems are headless though that might be problematic if one won't boot or he needs to do something outside a software environment that can support those things.

He might also look at Integrated Lights Out Modules. That way his controls are not dependent on the host OS.

Re:Is it worth doing this in hardware?

[unrtst]

IMO, I'd forego the expensive matrix KVM's as well as the loggy VNC-like solutions.

Many monitors support multiple inputs. If yours doesn't, get some that do.
Use the monitors input switching for video input changes. That takes care of video (I'm pretty sure 3 inputs each is more than feasible).

For the keyboard and mouse, use any of the existing hardware solutions for those (there are old manual switches that work with PS-2 and AT stuff that are dirt cheap, and would do the job, for example). Alternatively, use something like synergy (http://synergy-project.org/)

just put everything in VM's

[Anonymous Coward]

just put everything in VM's

and in the darkness bind them

Re:just put everything in VM's

[Culture20]

just put everything in VM's

You could use Linux KVM for that! Not to confuse the issue...

Synergy + Monitor Inputs

[fsh]

I do something similar to what your looking for with a combination of Synergy (http://synergy-project.org/), which uses your network to send the keyboard/mouse inputs to the correct computer based on your mouse position), and multiple inputs on my monitors. In other words: PC1 would be your base computer, and would have the keyboard/mouse you want to use with everything attached. PC1 would be attached to the primary port of both monitors (HDMI, for instance) PC2 would also have a keyboard/mouse, but they wouldn't be used. It would be hooked up to the secondary port of both monitors (maybe displayport) DOCK1 will obviously have the laptops built-in keyboard/mouse, but that wouldn't be used. It would be hooked up to the third port of both monitors (maybe DVI or RGB) In this setup, you'll need to manually change the monitor inputs, and synergy will direct the keyboard/mouse to the correct places. As far as I know, your only other option would be the matrix KVM (as mentioned above a few times)

Re:Synergy + Monitor Inputs

[funwithBSD]

Synergy automatically handles these edge cases. When I plug my external monitor in, synergy does not care if the laptop screen keeps working as screen 2, or everything goes to the external.

If I unplug one of the two monitors attached to the PC, Synergy still does not care.

I have even had 3 set up, and attach mouse to the one that won't move, and place the others on either side. That way, if they are missing, it does not cause any problems.

What does not change is the boundary. If I used both monitors and it is "taller" than the other screen you have to move the mouse to the lower screen before sliding to a side to change computers.

For one, synergy...

[Junta]

It may be best to figure out a way to wire up your monitor multiple inputs up to the various desktops, and using the monitor input switch buttons. For the input, synergy (http://synergy-project.org/) which I haven't had use for in a long time. Otherwise, just have some close at hand usb hubs close and move the cables around. There exist 'cleaner' KVM devices to do this, but they are way expensive. If your monitor inputs are lacking, new monitors are likely cheaper than the KVM device you would need to not get new monitors. Monitors with three digital inputs would probably be the easiest thing to meet the requirements verbatim.

For another, I'm really wondering why you feel this need so strongly. What tasks are you spreading amongst all these systems? How many of these tasks *really* indicate need for directly using the attached 'head' versus remote access (RDP, VNC, ssh, whatever). Is there a good reason that the things that really need direct connectivity can't be grouped into a single system? If not a single system, narrow down to 2 PCs and comfortably fit on your monitor inputs.

Re:For one, synergy...

[ChromaticDragon]

The one thing missing in this description is requirements for and/or support of networking.

I've wrestled with stuff like this. I agree with all folk suggesting VNC, RDP and the like. If these can meet the need, then I bet the end experience will be better. Cheap KVM switches suck.

But, there's one simple thing that can render this unsuitable: VPN requirements. Several VPN clients are designed to shut off all other networking while initiating the VPN session. This will kill all these solutions that depend on local networking. So if one or more of his machines are essentially used to access separate VPNs, he really may be stuck with KVM-like solutions.

If this is the case, there may be one other solution. I was very pleased when my company switched VPN clients and I could finally have concurrent networking. I ditched my KVM switch. Now they're switching VPN clients again and supposedly the laptop will be locked down again. The solution here is to switch to a VM on said laptop and run the VPN client from within the VM. Now that we're going VM though, why even turn on the laptop? Well, if you will need to travel, you do want the laptop ready to go. So, keep the VM on the laptop. But for the OP, with just one laptop, I have to wonder if one of these desktops couldn't be folded into a VM on the second.

HP-RGS: better than RDP/VNC & simpler than KVM

[kyubre]

I spent about 6 months working on this product last year:

http://www8.hp.com/us/en/campa...

HP's RGS is really excellent remote graphics solution, suitable for the likes of film production studios and CAD/CAM design firms - at 4K resolutions and 30FPS video. It all sports support for a plethora of input devices from Wacom tablets to speciality LogiTech mice. To top it off, its bidirectionally compatible with Windows and Linux and Mac can be coaxed into working as well.