Searching \ for '[EE]: VNC' in subject line. ()
Make payments with PayPal - it's fast, free and secure! Help us get a faster server
FAQ page: massmind.org/techref/index.htm?key=vnc
Search entire site for: 'VNC'.

Exact match. Not showing close matches.
PICList Thread
'[EE]: VNC'
2001\10\04@091612 by Russell McMahon

picon face
Comments from anyone conversant with AT&T's VNC (Virtual Network Computing)
remote control software would be appreciated.

Have just been trialling VNC across my LAN.
The controlled PC (server) is a 300 MHz Pentium equivalent, WIN95,  and
controlling PC (viewer) is 500 MHz WIN98 SE.
10 Mbps PCI UTP NICs.
Performance is clunky but useable.


Is there free software available with superior functionality? (VNC = gpl =
free :-) ).

Is there for-money equivalent functionality software available which is
superior enough in capability to be worth the cost?

What changes are most liable to improve performance?
(server CPU, network speed, .... ?)

Any advice / do's / dont's ?

I note that changing server video resolution from the viewer breaks the
session down - not very surprising.
No problem in this application but would be a nuisance with remote sessions.



regards


           Russell McMahon

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads


2001\10\04@094319 by D Lloyd

flavicon
face
Hi,

Our "IT" uses WinVNC for remote control - seems OK but it has caused a BSOD
on rare occasions.

Regards,
Dan

To: spam_OUTPICLISTTakeThisOuTspamMITVMA.MIT.EDU
cc:
From: Russell McMahon <.....apptechKILLspamspam@spam@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Subject: [EE]: VNC



Comments from anyone conversant with AT&T's VNC (Virtual Network Computing)
remote control software would be appreciated.

Have just been trialling VNC across my LAN.
The controlled PC (server) is a 300 MHz Pentium equivalent, WIN95,  and
controlling PC (viewer) is 500 MHz WIN98 SE.
10 Mbps PCI UTP NICs.
Performance is clunky but useable.


Is there free software available with superior functionality? (VNC = gpl =
free :-) ).

Is there for-money equivalent functionality software available which is
superior enough in capability to be worth the cost?

What changes are most liable to improve performance?
(server CPU, network speed, .... ?)

Any advice / do's / dont's ?

I note that changing server video resolution from the viewer breaks the
session down - not very surprising.
No problem in this application but would be a nuisance with remote
sessions.



regards


           Russell McMahon

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads


2001\10\04@095624 by Russell Farnhill

flavicon
face
Hi,

       I use vnc on windows and Solaris and find dropping the desktop
       colour depth speeds things up a lot. You can usually set this
       on the client connection end.

       Also if you goto vnc homepage, can't remember of top of my head
       but they have some third party add-ons that add some kind of
compression
       into the application, but I think you have to recompile it yourself
       including the new libs.

       I also use PcAnywhere and find it a lot quicker than vnc, but then
again
       that's not free.

Thanks,

Russ.

{Original Message removed}

2001\10\04@101455 by nrad Labuschagne

flavicon
face
We have VNC(it is slow and sometimes doesn't update the refresh of the
screen, so you have to "paint" your new view.)
But we also have something called DameWare which seems better.

{Original Message removed}

2001\10\04@105028 by steve.pepper

flavicon
face
Russell,

I have used VNC on a number of platforms but my main experiance is under
Windows NT and 2000. It works very well with some limitations.

1. It's slow over a low bandwidth network. This can be overcome by third
party versions optimised for use over low bandwidth and\or tweaking the
screen resolution and colour depth. I have used TridiaVNC and it works ok.
See
http://www.ce.cctpu.edu.ru/vnc/

2. Security is non existant because it has to be cross platform independant.
Also, is you use the standard distribution which most users do, the
encryption key is known to anyone trying to hack it because it's open
source. I've seen a machine hacked into in under 30 seconds with VNC
installed on an NT machine. There is a distribution that integrates with the
NT\2000 security system which is much better. See
http://www.andrew.cmu.edu/~jsmolens/vnc/vnc_ntauth/

I ended up using terminal services built into Windows 2000 server because
the remote controlled machines were security sensitive.

Steve


> {Original Message removed}

2001\10\04@114258 by Bob Blick

face
flavicon
face
> Comments from anyone conversant with AT&T's VNC (Virtual Network Computing)
> remote control software would be appreciated.
>
> Have just been trialling VNC across my LAN.
> The controlled PC (server) is a 300 MHz Pentium equivalent, WIN95,  and
> controlling PC (viewer) is 500 MHz WIN98 SE.
> 10 Mbps PCI UTP NICs.
> Performance is clunky but useable.

Hi Russell,

I use VNC and find the performance controlling a Linux box for either Win
or Linux to be good. Controlling a Win box is less than speedy even with a
100Mbps link. But I use it on a daily basis.

The default version is bad security, don't know if that's important to
you(it isn't to me).

It is the only free solution I know of. It's never crashed my computer.

PC Anywhere is another program I've used, and it is fast, a bit harder to
figure out and get working, bloatware, and not free. But performance is
good. Only Win to Win, of course.

Cheerful regards,

Bob

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads


2001\10\04@133228 by Paul Hutchinson

flavicon
face
I looked at but never tried VNC.

Instead I use MS Netmeeting version 3, the remote desktop sharing works well
for me. I use it to control an old Pentium 133 w/Win98 located on the other
side of my office. I use the old PC for a couple of ICE's and as a
datalogger.

There is password protection so, it does have some security but, since it's
a M$ product the security is probably flawed in some way.

The biggest speed boost I found was setting the remote PC's screen to low
resolution (800x600) and 16 colors.

Paul



{Quote hidden}

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads


2001\10\04@224106 by M. Adam Davis

flavicon
face
I've had problems with VNC in that it cannot allways tell when a program
writes to the screen, so it can take up to several seconds before the
screen changes for any given program.  It is also very slow compared to
PCAnywhere.

You can use other compression programs to speed it up (haven't been able
to try yet, but working on it), but until they find better hooks into
windows screen updating, it will always have some problems
viewing/controlling windows computers.

It was created to control unix servers from windows, so obviously the
support is better that direction.

Over a LAN, the performance is (for me) just fine, and I've been able to
identify the programs that cause problems (pcanywhere, for instance :-)

But were I you, I'd just upgrade to windows XP, which has a remote
desktop feature that pretty much does exactly what you need, and
probebly better since MS can track all the unpublished screen api's...

-Adam

Russell McMahon wrote:

{Quote hidden}

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads


2001\10\04@232559 by Kris Wilk

flavicon
face
None of these is surprising, but they are my VNC rules:

1) Turn off wallpaper! A BIG VNC bandwidth waster.

2) Use the lowest resolution acceptable.

3) Use the lowest colour depth acceptable.

4) Use the VNC viewer program to access machines rather than the java
access via a web browser. In a pinch (i.e. out in the field where you only
have a web browser) the java applet is okay. But the VNC viewer app behaves
much better (and faster) in my experience.

5) Use the fastest network connection you can, obviously. Response speed is
basically proportional to network throughput.

There might be 'better' software out there, but I like VNC because it's
free, supports just about any platform, and it's a piece of cake to
install/use.

Kris Wilk
ReefNet Inc.
http://www.reefnet.on.ca

At 09:05 AM 10/4/2001, you wrote:
{Quote hidden}

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads


More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 2001 , 2002 only
- Today
- New search...