On 2/3/00, 2:58:37 PM, Peter Rundle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
regarding Re: [SLUG] Vnc Linx and Solaris colour problems:
> > What advantages does that arrangement give you over an X11 login
> > or xproxy session?
> VNC is actually workable over a 33K dial-up where as X just don't.
> (well ok xeyes works but that doesn't really count)
Well, I've done it, but you're right: it's not pretty. I was about to
give the LBX extensions a go (for accessing my box from work) but work
upgraded their network connection...
> Also if I start a desktop command I can axe the vnc session and
> hang up the phone, come back later and check on it's progress
> where as with X if the phone drops out then the command terminates.
I thought that might be the big win. Does that mean that you have the
VNC server talking to your actual, current console X session, or you
run the separate VNC X server as a second session?
I believe that there are a couple of X-proxy related tools available
that let you do this sort of thing using X.
I don't really understand why VNC would be better than X on a dialup,
though. My reading of the VNC site suggested that it was entirely
based on (compressed) bitmap transmission. At least X knows a lot
about what's going on, so bulk text is transmitted in ASCII, key
presses in scan codes, windows know about save-unders, line drawing
and box filling happen by command.
Am I wrong? (Well, obviously about the results, but the mechanism?)
Anyone have any good explanations?
Thanks,
--
Andrew
--
SLUG - Sydney Linux Users Group Mailing List - http://www.slug.org.au
To unsubscribe send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
unsubscribe in the text
