On Fri, 5 Apr 2002, Benjamin Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Karl Runge is on the right track. X is very senstive to latency. The
> bandwidth requirements can actually be fairly minor for simple constructs
> (e.g., a GNU Emacs window), but a high-latency link will kill you.
Yes, and I wanted to point out that tcl/tk apps (like exmh) and big
motif-ish apps (like netscape) usually become unbearable under
dialup-level latency (100-300ms).
OTOH, I find the response of lightweight gui X apps (e.g. Xaw based
ones like my mail reader) to be acceptable under most conditions. Then
again, having used remote computers almost daily for the past 18 years
has likely made me very patient wrt interactive response :-)
I did an exmh test just now to a ssh/vnc "landing pad" I have in the
west coast (120ms ping times from here):
exmh thru a ssh X redir (no vnc) was OK for the changing text, but
the gui widget aspects (dialog popups, menus, etc) were painfully
slow (e.g. often 2-6 secs to map the new windows).
exmh via vnc on the ssh link had much better response (e.g. < 1 sec
to map the new windoes), most all aspects seemed tolerable/usable.
(it goes w/o saying no fancy backgrounds or polished metal,
translucifying, wm's for the vnc session (I use fvwm + solid bg))
Of course the response will never be as good as running exmh on the
local box, but I am firm believer in stretching my MUA's view of my
mail over to my remote location (the fastest being ssh + a cmdline MUA,
like pine), rather than teeing my mailbox to my remote location. But,
of course, YMMV.
*****************************************************************
To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body.
*****************************************************************
