In my experience Thinstuff RDP performs a lot better than VNC. Jpeg compression is nice, but RDP client side caches are a lot better. Our tests have shown that the bandwidth necessary for proper operation is a lot lower compared to VNC (especially interesting for home users with ADSL lines). The Thinstuff RDP software also has a lot of advantages in management and features compared to VNC.
I would even say that the amount of RAM necessary for a centralized server servicing all the users is less than 256 MB due to memory optimizations the operating systems do (e.g. under windows dll code memory sharing between processe or with Linux intelligently mapping the code from the disk to virtual memory).
Also resource usage is a lot better because on most fat-client networks exist users which idle with only some small apps opened and others need more powerful-than-standard PCs to fulfill there special requirements (e.g. special applications). Getting a homogeneous environment is not very easy, if possible at all. Such resource distribution between users can be done automatically and on-demand on centralized servers.
Running VNC is probably not the best solution for Linux environments (even with Windows CE thin clients). Running X11 natively (e.g. via -query) or using terminal servers like Thinstuff RDP Server provide a lot more performance and manageability.
In my opinion this article does not present any new facts. It has already been proven for years that server based computing can cut down costs drastically. Terminal server software like the Thinstuff RDP Server for Linux (www.thinstuff.com), Microsoft's terminal services (http://www.microsoft.com/), Citrix (http://www.citrix.com/) and others provide solutions which can never be perfectly solved in a distributed fat-client environment, with distributed updates, security policies for home working laptops,...
Slashdot Mirror
In my experience Thinstuff RDP performs a lot better than VNC. Jpeg compression is nice, but RDP client side caches are a lot better. Our tests have shown that the bandwidth necessary for proper operation is a lot lower compared to VNC (especially interesting for home users with ADSL lines).
The Thinstuff RDP software also has a lot of advantages in management and features compared to VNC.
I would even say that the amount of RAM necessary for a centralized server servicing all the users is less than 256 MB due to memory optimizations the operating systems do (e.g. under windows dll code memory sharing between processe or with Linux intelligently mapping the code from the disk to virtual memory).
Also resource usage is a lot better because on most fat-client networks exist users which idle with only some small apps opened and others need more powerful-than-standard PCs to fulfill there special requirements (e.g. special applications). Getting a homogeneous environment is not very easy, if possible at all. Such resource distribution between users can be done automatically and on-demand on centralized servers.
Running VNC is probably not the best solution for Linux environments (even with Windows CE thin clients). Running X11 natively (e.g. via -query) or using terminal servers like Thinstuff RDP Server provide a lot more performance and manageability.
In my opinion this article does not present any new facts. It has already been proven for years that server based computing can cut down costs drastically. Terminal server software like the Thinstuff RDP Server for Linux (www.thinstuff.com), Microsoft's terminal services (http://www.microsoft.com/), Citrix (http://www.citrix.com/) and others provide solutions which can never be perfectly solved in a distributed fat-client environment, with distributed updates, security policies for home working laptops,...