| 1 |
On 6/12/2010, at 4:57pm, Mark Knecht wrote: |
| 2 |
> ... |
| 3 |
> So if I understand, this would require that I start vmplayer at the |
| 4 |
> remote but don't display it locally? |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
The question is maybe moot because you're running XP. But Windows (for example the server versions) can allow multiple Remote Desktop sessions on the same box, without any of them displaying on the screen. |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
> Then, once that's running use |
| 9 |
> remote desktop (or maybe VNC?) to display it here locally? |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> As I'm running XP Home on both ends I'm not sure the Remote Desktop |
| 12 |
> app will work, but VNC is a possibility I suppose. Maybe I could |
| 13 |
> create a new user at the remote machine and then get someone to log |
| 14 |
> into that, starting that desktop displayed down there, and have that |
| 15 |
> environment automatically start VNC. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
The point I was trying to make was that Remote Desktop is a faster protocol than VNC or anything else, if you're viewing a remote Windows box and able to use it (e.g. if you're viewing XP Pro; XP Home might be able to send viewing "requests", I can't recall how they work). |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
I'm not 100% clear how you're doing things at the moment. Are you using an X11 connection to view the screen at the moment? If so I would certainly try a VNC connection. I have this notion that VM screen viewers may use VNC themselves. The free version of RealVNC server can run at start up, and allows you to remotely click on the duck to login. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
Remote viewing on a home DSL connection can be very frustrating. I have a couple of network KVMs here that really are much better run at 1024x768 or below *even on the LAN*. Over a home DSL connection you may be looking at 800x600 &/or using grayscale or 256 colours (grayscale looks better, IMO). Some VNC software is faster than others. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
Stroller. |
Archives