On Thu, May 25, 2006 at 12:08:15PM +0100, Tim Green wrote:
On 5/25/06, Brett Parker iDunno@sommitrealweird.co.uk wrote:
On Thu, May 25, 2006 at 11:46:10AM +0100, David Simon Cooper wrote:
Tim Green wrote:
On 5/25/06, chrisisbd@leary.csoft.net chrisisbd@leary.csoft.net wrote:
Does anyone have any ideas about, or is there a web site that will tell me about, the relative speeds of different ways of running X applications across the internet?
Investigate VNC - it was designed for this.
I use the free version of VNC for things like this and use custom port numbers which make it a little harder to sniff. I only use it in small bursts and I ensure that I never type passwords or enter user ID's into web browsers whilst using the connection. Keystrokes other than the initial password request during connection, are unencrypted.
Err, I think you'll find the initial password also travels over the net unencrypted. It certainly used to.
In which case tunnel it over ssh or a vpn.
*All* of which is entirely irrelevant to my original question! :-)
Running application xxx directly as an X application using an ssh tunnel will surely be faster than running application xxx on the remote system and then running the whole X desktop via VNC (over an ssh tunnel or not).
OK, it's not so portable as I need to be running an X server at the 'client' end (where I want to sit and use the application) but that's my situation. I want to run a remote X client application on my X desktop, it's what X is designed for. All I want are ways to optimise the X traffic across the internet, if that's possible.
... and no, it's *not* true that VNC was "designed for this", VNC was designed for remote control of another computer and that is most definitely not what I want to do. It could well be that someone else is using that remote computer at the remote location. My X application will run quite happily without them even noticing (unless I hog lots of processor of course).