| |||||||||||||
Why VNC and not RDP?Why VNC and not RDP?Posted Feb 13, 2013 23:17 UTC (Wed) by drag (subscriber, #31333)In reply to: Why VNC and not RDP? by Fats Parent article: LCA: The ways of Wayland
There are massive different levels of performance between VNC implementations. VNC _can_ be very fast, but if you just do a 'apt-get install vncserver' and play around with it for a half a hour you wouldn't get that impression at all.
(Log in to post comments)
Why VNC and not RDP? Posted Feb 17, 2013 6:07 UTC (Sun) by speedster1 (subscriber, #8143) [Link]
> VNC _can_ be very fast, but if you just do a 'apt-get install vncserver' and play around with it for a half a hour you wouldn't get that impression at all.
I've been frustrated at the NX stagmentation, never having seen aforementioned decent VNC performance outside of a LAN. Can you tell us your tricks for getting VNC to have good performance over a WAN? Hm that would make a great LUG meeting topic...
Why VNC and not RDP? Posted Feb 20, 2013 7:33 UTC (Wed) by speedster1 (subscriber, #8143) [Link]
> VNC _can_ be very fast
One more try, because you left this tantalizing statement without any hints as how to achieve it. I'd like to see this "very fast" VNC over a DSL link, where up to now NX is the only remote technology I've seen that was not painfully slow. Hints on how you achieved souped-up VNC performance, pretty please?
Why VNC and not RDP? Posted Feb 20, 2013 16:02 UTC (Wed) by raven667 (subscriber, #5198) [Link]
You might want to spend an evening playing with a few different implementations such as tight, real, tiger, etc. they all seem to have different compression techniques, some of which are very good.
|
|||||||||||||