>Hello...
>
>On Saturday 21 April 2001 01:07, you wrote:
>> It may be, under certain conditions. If you have any suggestions on how to
>> improve the VNC protocol, suggest away. Meanwhile, VNC has the big
>> advantages of being "fast enough" and of being Free.
>
>Today I tested a Linux VNC-session with a 33Kbps modem over the internet and
>its very very slow with the VNC Tight Encoder too - have I made something
>wrong? (will try it with a ISDN connection soon) A M$ user "friend" ;-) has
>told me he can use a Windows-session over ICA with a 33 modem without any
>problems and with a mobile.phone connection too. I can't believe that!
I did read Michael Milette's excelent post on ICA as well, so this
may have some responses to it as well.
Some background on where I am coming from. I am a UNIX admin who
uses VNC for remote control of various platforms. I also lend a had
to our Metaframe admin when he has trouble.
The basic server (Winframe or Terminal Server) only supports MS
Windows platforms, adding the Metaframe piece to the server, which is
quite a bit of money, is necessary to add support for non MS clients
(MacOS, Java, UNIX, etc). There is now a server for UNIX.
Metaframe is based on Windows NT 4.0 (as Terminal server is based on
Windows 2000) but it is NOT NT. There are separate Service Packs
(and you CANNOT install the normal ones!). We have run into a lot of
application issues. Applications that install or upgrade shared dll
files into the system directory can really screw up things.
Applications that want to write to c:\temp or the application
directory don't work well or at all (since that is a shared
directory, and in most installations locked down). Silly things that
would require a reboot on a Windows NT system will on a Metaframe
server as well, but it is going to affect more than just a single
user.
The client, in particular the Win32 client, is quite fat.
Some of the positive things I have found about Metaframe. You can
export a single application cleanly (very cool). It has build in
compression and encryption that is better than VNC. Users can define
their own display settings (individual settings for depth, sound, and
resolution). The server clustering and application balancing works
well. You can map local printers and drives to your server session.
You can't, to my knowledge, share a session with Metaframe (I know
the admin can view or control a session though).
All in all both fill nitches. Metaframe is better for centralized
application shared (if the application works on it). VNC is great
for individual desktop control and for cross platform connections. I
have also found VNC's client much easier to distribute, since it is
one binary with no required configuration while Metaframe's client
has to be configured for your server (unless you happen to be on the
same local subnet) and has a myiad of configuration options (which is
good for an advanced user but really hard to get set up for a
beginner).
--
--------------
David A. Smith
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
The box said: "Needs Windows 98 or better," so I bought a Macintosh.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, send a message with the line: unsubscribe vnc-list
to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
See also: http://www.uk.research.att.com/vnc/intouch.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------
