Re: Remote X windows
Hi Alex Shnitman wrote: --ReaqsoxgOBHFXBhH Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, Yedidya Bar-david! On Tue, Jan 11, 2000 at 12:49:43AM +0200, you wrote the following: BTW, I think there is a free (shareware?) Xserver for win32, don't remember details, but look at windows archives. I suppose you're talking about MI/X I don't recall that name. I am almost sure there are more than one. Looking at simtelnet (a DOS/win shareware archives mirror system, at e.g. ftp://sunsite.cnlab-switch.ch/mirror/simtelnet) there are 2 others (haven't checked them). Also there, there is a port of XFree86 3.1.2 to DOS, called xapeal (quite old, probably dead by now). (http://www.microimages.com/freestuf/mix/). I used it and it's substandard. It only runs full-screen (can't use Windows as the window manager), doesn't support XDMCP or anything of the kind (so you have to telnet to the remote host and start applications from there), and any window manager that's a bit more complicated than twm (an .exe of which comes with it, BTW) crashes it very fast. In other words, it's not generally usable. That's sad. Do search for others, as they are surely exist. I can add that I found linux on a 486 with 8 MB RAM to be quite a good Xterminal (for my purposes), and anything on win32 needed at least a Pentium 100 with 32 MB to come close. I noticed that on machines of that kind (486 with 8 MB of RAM) opening Netscape windows takes a lot of time (10-15 seconds or so). Everything works perfectly, just opening Netscape windows is slow. And it only happens with Netscape 4. On other X-terminals which are more powerful machines, on the same network, these windows open much faster. I wonder what the hell is Netscape doing to achieve this exclusionary effect. I have no explanation, but I can add that Netscape is slow in general - it was teribbly slow on my 486 with 24MB (as a workstation, not pure XTerminal). (I keep saying win32 becasue there are big differences between win95/98 and NT in this issue - do check your configuration). Could you elaborate on this topic a bit? I'm not sure I understand what you mean here. I will at least try. Something like 3-4 years ago, I had to test the possibility to make a move from unix workstation at user's desk to XTerminals of any kind. It was an XLib application, using hebrew fonts, and required 'backing store' and 'save unders' (maybe not both) - that is, quite stupid (can't redraw itself). I tried 2 XServers for windows (a bit on 3.11, and mostly on 95 and NT) - one was Xoftware, the other I am not sure I remember (probably Xinside by FTP Software is such a product/company exist?). Xoftware had then their first 32bit version (their 3.11 version was really poor). The CD had 2 different versions: for 95 and for NT. However, though they were different, you could install each of them on either 95 or NT, and some problems were only dependent on the OS version (although others on the software version). I don't remember specifics, but making hebrew fonts was hard, and there were many problems with backing store/save unders. Also, speed was slow, and depended on OS (e.g., when you selected and deselected text on xterms, it was jumpy on one OS, don't remember which). Anyway, I haven't managed to make it use hebrew fonts on hebrew enabled NT, even with the recent version (at least the newest I have - I think 7.0). I now use Xcursion from digital, which has no problems with hebrew, and works fine on NT, and has (at least for me) only 2 problems: 1. You can't assign it a display number. This means you can only run one instance at any time on one machine, because the TCP port number is determined by the display number (and it was problematic for me, becasue I tried to use it on Windows NT Terminal server). 2. If you press it's full screen button, at least as a single large window (the way I prefer), it adds scroll bars, even if you don't select them in the config. I do hate that, and simply not press that button... --=20 Alex Shnitman| http://www.debian.org [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] +--- http://alexsh.hectic.netUIN 188956PGP key on web page E1 F2 7B 6C A0 31 80 28 63 B8 02 BA 65 C7 8B BA Software suppliers are trying to make their software packages more "user-friendly". ... Their best approach, so far, has been to take all the old brochures, and stamp the words, "user-friendly" on the cover. -- Bill Gates, Microsoft, Inc. --ReaqsoxgOBHFXBhH Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iQCVAwUBOHpmkFb2jADsXWGdAQEvwAQAnwF6AlepbftNT3Y5zXfQikiZUSyHe6ep L5JTAIRrm2NlQR2Zz+IQPF5atpAkhQCDREYFl5xQyVk0DXbNRBlJAfQwAvP7E5aO XOvfIFdU4qTnuKYIY9VyJ2NUivVRJfsuEpzBSysPV03LNVenm70ojBR8a7Qbpp/T BHFIpdZ2hfw=
Re: Remote X windows
I saw in freshmeat somethind called WeirdX . It is an X server written in java. I'm not sure how well (actually - how bad) it performs, but given the quality of MI/X - there is a good chance that this WeirdX will not be as bad... And it is GPLed. BTW: there is also a port of XFree86 to win32, but it's still pre-apha, and not usable. Th URL, IIRC: http://sourceware.cygnus.com/cygwin/xfree Tzafrir Cohen mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.technion.ac.il/~tzafrir On Fri, 14 Jan 100, Yedidya Bar-david wrote: Hi Alex Shnitman wrote: --ReaqsoxgOBHFXBhH Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, Yedidya Bar-david! On Tue, Jan 11, 2000 at 12:49:43AM +0200, you wrote the following: BTW, I think there is a free (shareware?) Xserver for win32, don't remember details, but look at windows archives. I suppose you're talking about MI/X I don't recall that name. I am almost sure there are more than one. Looking at simtelnet (a DOS/win shareware archives mirror system, at e.g. ftp://sunsite.cnlab-switch.ch/mirror/simtelnet) there are 2 others (haven't checked them). Also there, there is a port of XFree86 3.1.2 to DOS, called xapeal (quite old, probably dead by now). (http://www.microimages.com/freestuf/mix/). I used it and it's substandard. It only runs full-screen (can't use Windows as the window manager), doesn't support XDMCP or anything of the kind (so you have to telnet to the remote host and start applications from there), and any window manager that's a bit more complicated than twm (an .exe of which comes with it, BTW) crashes it very fast. In other words, it's not generally usable. That's sad. Do search for others, as they are surely exist. I can add that I found linux on a 486 with 8 MB RAM to be quite a good Xterminal (for my purposes), and anything on win32 needed at least a Pentium 100 with 32 MB to come close. I noticed that on machines of that kind (486 with 8 MB of RAM) opening Netscape windows takes a lot of time (10-15 seconds or so). Everything works perfectly, just opening Netscape windows is slow. And it only happens with Netscape 4. On other X-terminals which are more powerful machines, on the same network, these windows open much faster. I wonder what the hell is Netscape doing to achieve this exclusionary effect. I have no explanation, but I can add that Netscape is slow in general - it was teribbly slow on my 486 with 24MB (as a workstation, not pure XTerminal). (I keep saying win32 becasue there are big differences between win95/98 and NT in this issue - do check your configuration). Could you elaborate on this topic a bit? I'm not sure I understand what you mean here. I will at least try. Something like 3-4 years ago, I had to test the possibility to make a move from unix workstation at user's desk to XTerminals of any kind. It was an XLib application, using hebrew fonts, and required 'backing store' and 'save unders' (maybe not both) - that is, quite stupid (can't redraw itself). I tried 2 XServers for windows (a bit on 3.11, and mostly on 95 and NT) - one was Xoftware, the other I am not sure I remember (probably Xinside by FTP Software is such a product/company exist?). Xoftware had then their first 32bit version (their 3.11 version was really poor). The CD had 2 different versions: for 95 and for NT. However, though they were different, you could install each of them on either 95 or NT, and some problems were only dependent on the OS version (although others on the software version). I don't remember specifics, but making hebrew fonts was hard, and there were many problems with backing store/save unders. Also, speed was slow, and depended on OS (e.g., when you selected and deselected text on xterms, it was jumpy on one OS, don't remember which). Anyway, I haven't managed to make it use hebrew fonts on hebrew enabled NT, even with the recent version (at least the newest I have - I think 7.0). I now use Xcursion from digital, which has no problems with hebrew, and works fine on NT, and has (at least for me) only 2 problems: 1. You can't assign it a display number. This means you can only run one instance at any time on one machine, because the TCP port number is determined by the display number (and it was problematic for me, becasue I tried to use it on Windows NT Terminal server). 2. If you press it's full screen button, at least as a single large window (the way I prefer), it adds scroll bars, even if you don't select them in the config. I do hate that, and simply not press that button... --=20 Alex Shnitman| http://www.debian.org [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] +--- http://alexsh.hectic.netUIN 188956PGP key on web page E1 F2 7B 6C A0 31 80 28 63 B8 02 BA 65 C7 8B BA Software suppliers are
Re[2]: Remote X windows
Yedidya Bar-david [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: No Xserver for windows I ever tested became even near XFree under linux, especially in terms of performance - and that is understandable, becasue each graphic command passes 2 APIs (at least) - win32 and X. Then one should expect a factor of two; in reality, however, the difference is much stronger. I once checked the load of an Xterminal on a LAN, and got 100% load quite easily by iconifing and deiconifing a large window several times. On a LAN. (10mbit/s ethernet, only client+server+sniffer). Just a badly written application... most probably, including a drawing area without double buffering or like; (de)iconifying should produce not more than a few X-protocol bytes. Regards, Evgeny -- / Evgeny Stambulchik [EMAIL PROTECTED] \ / Plasma Laboratory, Weizmann Institute of Science, Israel \ \ | Phone : (972)8-934-3610 == | == FAX : (972)8-934-3491 | | | URL :http://plasma-gate.weizmann.ac.il/~fnevgeny/ | | | Finger for PGP key =+ | |__| = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Remote X windows
Hi Hetz Ben Hamo wrote: Hi, I'm looking to put a Linux box at my work for the employees to learn Linux and use it from their Windows NT machines at work, and for me - from home.. I have tried VNC - but it seems that: 1. This program is not built to run for multiple users (you need to run for each one "vncserver") 2. It's SLOW - very slow over ISDN (64k) connection.. I've looked a bit for a solution which will: 1. Run an X enviroment on NT 2. Can be used with multiple connection (in other words - built for multi users) 3. Can connect over modem/ISDN line. So far I have found Starnet Xwin Hummingbird exceed .. Anyone here with experiment with one of those programs? are they easy to configure? other alternatives? 1. Concerning an XServer for windows - from what I heard, eXceed is the best (as others on the list said). I never used it, though. I used, for several years now, both Xoftware and eXcursion. Both were quite good, with few problems in each. Tell me if you want specifics, but I do suggest you test whatever you choose quite well before investing large amounts of money (and these things tend to be quite expensive). BTW, I think there is a free (shareware?) Xserver for win32, don't remember details, but look at windows archives. No Xserver for windows I ever tested became even near XFree under linux, especially in terms of performance - and that is understandable, becasue each graphic command passes 2 APIs (at least) - win32 and X. If one want's to make a fair comparison, one should probably compare Xnest under XFree and an Xserver under win32 - I didn't. I can add that I found linux on a 486 with 8 MB RAM to be quite a good Xterminal (for my purposes), and anything on win32 needed at least a Pentium 100 with 32 MB to come close. (I keep saying win32 becasue there are big differences between win95/98 and NT in this issue - do check your configuration). 2. Concerning the slow connection - as someone said, there is dxpc. I used it and it works. However, I think it is dead, for maybe 2 years, the reason (probably) being the addition of the (now standard) LBX (Low Bandwidth X) extension to X (see lbxproxy(1)). I don't know if it got all of dxpc's abilities. If you intend to make heavy use of it - check them both. In any case, it is going to be slow. The best compressor will achive probably 5 times compression, which will give you 300kbit/s bandwidth (max). I once checked the load of an Xterminal on a LAN, and got 100% load quite easily by iconifing and deiconifing a large window several times. On a LAN. (10mbit/s ethernet, only client+server+sniffer). Thanks -- Hetz Ben Hamo - Sys. Admin. - Intercomp [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Redmond, you have a problem.. = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Hope this helps, didi = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Remote X windows
I don't know about performance on a slow connection wan, but PC-Xware from NCD works fine in local network. Try their site. = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Remote X windows
Hi, I'm looking to put a Linux box at my work for the employees to learn Linux and use it from their Windows NT machines at work, and for me - from home.. I have tried VNC - but it seems that: 1. This program is not built to run for multiple users (you need to run for each one "vncserver") 2. It's SLOW - very slow over ISDN (64k) connection.. I've looked a bit for a solution which will: 1. Run an X enviroment on NT 2. Can be used with multiple connection (in other words - built for multi users) 3. Can connect over modem/ISDN line. So far I have found Starnet Xwin Hummingbird exceed .. Anyone here with experiment with one of those programs? are they easy to configure? other alternatives? Thanks -- Hetz Ben Hamo - Sys. Admin. - Intercomp [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Redmond, you have a problem.. = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Remote X windows
On Sun, 9 Jan 2000, Hetz Ben Hamo wrote: I'm looking to put a Linux box at my work for the employees to learn Linux and use it from their Windows NT machines at work, and for me - from home.. I have tried VNC - but it seems that: 1. This program is not built to run for multiple users (you need to run for each one "vncserver") indeed, it's for taking control over a single screen, much like PCanywhere, not for remote access to apps. 2. It's SLOW - very slow over ISDN (64k) connection.. as any X application will be too. especially heavily graphic ones (Emacs, Netscape...) I've looked a bit for a solution which will: 1. Run an X enviroment on NT Exceed or Xwin-32 2. Can be used with multiple connection (in other words - built for multi users) ofcourse. config your xdm to allow your clients' fixed IPs. 3. Can connect over modem/ISDN line. any such solution will be very slow. you have been warned. So far I have found Starnet Xwin Hummingbird exceed .. yap... Anyone here with experiment with one of those programs? are they easy to configure? other alternatives? XFree on a Linux box? :-) -- Ira Abramov ; whois:IA58 ; www.scso.com ; all around Linux enthusiast 'Mounten' wird fuer drei Dinge benutzt: 'Aufsitzen' auf Pferde, 'einklinken' von Festplatten in Dateisysteme, und, nun, 'besteigen' beim Sex. (Christa Keil in a German posting: "Mounting is used for three things: climbing on a horse, linking in a hard disk unit in data systems, and, well, mounting during sex".) = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Remote X windows
Hi, Ira Abramov! On Sun, Jan 09, 2000 at 08:25:29PM +0200, you wrote the following: I've looked a bit for a solution which will: 1. Run an X enviroment on NT Exceed or Xwin-32 I've had fabulous experience with X-Win32, so if you can afford the price ($200 for a station), it's a great solution. 3. Can connect over modem/ISDN line. any such solution will be very slow. you have been warned. There's software that helps a little bit here, called dxpc -- "differential X protocol compressor". It acts as an X protocol proxy and compresses all the traffic. Pretty nifty. Anyone here with experiment with one of those programs? are they easy to configure? other alternatives? XFree on a Linux box? :-) Actually, for dedicated use (i.e. if you don't need to run Windows applications at the same time), this is a great solution, and I implemented it once in one school. There's even a special distribution for this purpose, called Xenu or Xdenu or something like that, search for it. It runs on UMSDOS, so you'll have a 15 MB or so C:\Linux directory (not a big deal), and then you can create an icon on the desktop for the loadlin batch file, and have xdenu automatically launch "X -remote server.com" -- very friendly and works very well. -- Alex Shnitman| http://www.debian.org [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] +--- http://alexsh.hectic.netUIN 188956PGP key on web page E1 F2 7B 6C A0 31 80 28 63 B8 02 BA 65 C7 8B BA "Xenix is the pinnacle of modern UNIX design, and will be used for many years to come." -- Xenix OS API manual PGP signature
Re: Remote X windows
Hi, Alex Shnitman! On Sun, Jan 09, 2000 at 08:38:33PM +0200, you wrote the following: launch "X -remote server.com" -- very friendly and works very well. Whoops. Of course it's -query, not -remote. -- Alex Shnitman| http://www.debian.org [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] +--- http://alexsh.hectic.netUIN 188956PGP key on web page E1 F2 7B 6C A0 31 80 28 63 B8 02 BA 65 C7 8B BA "If you continue running Windows, your system may become unstable." -- Windows 95 Blue Screen of Death PGP signature
Re: Remote X windows
I donno maybe using windows 2000 with terminat server or citrix would be the answer for that? Ely Levy System group Hebrew University Jerusalem Israel On Sun, 9 Jan 2000, Hetz Ben Hamo wrote: | Hi, | | I'm looking to put a Linux box at my work for the employees to learn | Linux and use it from their Windows NT machines at work, and for me - | from home.. | | I have tried VNC - but it seems that: | | 1. This program is not built to run for multiple users (you need to run | for each one "vncserver") | 2. It's SLOW - very slow over ISDN (64k) connection.. | | I've looked a bit for a solution which will: | | 1. Run an X enviroment on NT | 2. Can be used with multiple connection (in other words - built for | multi users) | 3. Can connect over modem/ISDN line. | | So far I have found Starnet Xwin Hummingbird exceed .. | | Anyone here with experiment with one of those programs? are they easy to | configure? other alternatives? | | Thanks | -- | Hetz Ben Hamo - Sys. Admin. - Intercomp | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | --- | Redmond, you have a problem.. | | = | To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with | the word"unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command | echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] | | = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
