On Wed, 1 Sep 2004 14:44:55 +0800, Bopolissimus Platypus Jr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:On Wed, 1 Sep 2004 13:57:58 +0800 (SGT), Kelsey Hartigan Go
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm not familiar with the Microsoft terminal services,
> but isn't this based on Citrix which should minimized
> the bandwidth required?
i haven't used it myself (i don't use windows anymore) but minimized/optimized or not, the feedback was still that it was too slow.
I do believe the poster was talking about the Remote Desktop feature
on Win2k servers, which is essentially similar to VNC (hence the
bandwidth saturation)
even if that is the case, the remote desktop of the MS terminal services consumes less bandwidth (and thus faster) than what vnc consumes with all the optimization options turned on.
i should know because i am using them both here in the project on a daily basis. not to mention that the security team here in the firm is suggesting that vnc be disabled because it is not secure[1].
ciao!
[1] i know there are ways to secure vnc (like running it in a tunnel) but those options are not feasible in our situation.
--
"Programming, an artform that fights back"
Anuerin G. Diaz
Registered Linux User #246176
Friendly Linux Board @ http://mandrakeusers.org/index.php --
Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (#PLUG @ irc.free.net.ph)
Official Website: http://plug.linux.org.ph
Searchable Archives: http://marc.free.net.ph
.
To leave, go to http://lists.q-linux.com/mailman/listinfo/plug
.
Are you a Linux newbie? To join the newbie list, go to
http://lists.q-linux.com/mailman/listinfo/ph-linux-newbie
