I think he's talking about VNC. Personally, VNC has never impressed me
that much. In fact, I often find it painful over 100Mbit switched
ethernet. (maybe some VNC servers are better than others, or it would be
used even less than it is) I really don't put VNC and the SunRay protocol
(heck, or even Windows RDP) in the same ballpark. I don't think anyone
would be happy using VNC as their primary desktop interface, wheras Sun
Ray works quite well for that.
In fact, here's how I explain the Sun Ray concept to fellow geeks:
It's like "VNC in a box", only it works REALLY well, doesn't suck, and
even does audio/peripherals.
I'm still itching to try Sun Ray over the Internet, but there are still 2
kinks in my way:
- SRSS doesn't do non-global zones, and my co-lo server is configured to
run everything non-system-wide administrative in a zone.
- The Sun Ray device would require an external box to do DHCP/VPN stuff to
enable it to talk to the remote server, and that means setting up a
very-much not-so-thin OpenBSD box (likely on an old SPARCstation), or
buying some not-so-cheap Cisco-esque box, or majorly hacking some Linksys
device.
---------------------------
Derek Konigsberg
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://hecgeek.blogspot.com
---------------------------
On Fri, 31 Mar 2006, Bob Doolittle wrote:
Jakob Oestergaard wrote:
On Thu, Mar 30, 2006 at 03:50:27PM -0500, Bob Doolittle wrote:
...
Cons:
...
I used vnc from home over vpn to the office a few days ago. A second
con, as I see it, is performance. I ran vnc over a 2Mbit/sec symmetrical
line, and while I was able to get some work done, it was very far from
pleasent. Screen updates are very slow. Sometimes things just lag half a
second, sometimes I would wait for 20-30 seconds to get all the screen
refreshes done.
If performance is this bad over a 2Mb/sec link,
something else is going wrong. Maybe your link is
very lossy, or maybe you have very high latency
(often it's latency, rather than bandwidth, that
kills performance for something like this). Was
this over a satellite link, perhaps? 'ping -s'
would be helpful.
FWIW, I worked for over a year on a Sun Ray
running to a remote (3000 miles away) server over
a 1.5 Mb/sec DSL link (recently they upgraded me to 5
Mb/sec). Initially my end-to-end round trip
latency was around 300ms, and performance (for
what I was doing) was only borderline usable. I
ran some tests (www.pingplotter.com is a great
tool if you have a Windows box to run it on), and
called my ISP and complained about the latency over
the link to my home (100ms), and they changed my
configuration to bring the total end-to-end
latency down to around 220ms, and the system
became quite usable. Over time everything has
improved. Now I have around 130ms end-to-end
latency, and it's great. Increasing my bandwidth
to 5Mb/s didn't really make a noticeable
improvement - it was the latency that was killing
me. Now, refreshing my complete 1920x1200
display takes about 1.5 seconds.
I would expect VNC to have a similar sensitivity
to latency. Sun Ray is much better, mind you -
VNC is a pretty crude model comparatively, but
using VNC to occasionally access your Sun Ray
session can be a good solution, if you have a
decent quality path to the server.
Clearly, setting a background image on the desktop with just a few
different colours would help.
Definitely.
Good luck,
Bob
But even on desktops completely filled
with rxvt/emacs/thunderbird, the updates were definintely not quick.
I will test this with a SunRay at home later when I have time. For me,
vnc is definitely not acceptable as a permanent solution.
_______________________________________________
SunRay-Users mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.filibeto.org/mailman/listinfo/sunray-users
_______________________________________________
SunRay-Users mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.filibeto.org/mailman/listinfo/sunray-users
