5 ms·

Back when I was poor and all I had was a laptop... my girlfriend wanted a computer but we didn't have enough money. So I loaded up virtual box and plugged in an

Back when I was poor and all I had was a laptop... my girlfriend wanted a computer but we didn't have enough money. So I loaded up virtual box and plugged in an external monitor, keyboard and mouse binding them to the virtual machine. This setup worked really well to let us both browse the internet simultaneously.

techolic 6y ago
That's a brilliant idea! I was mentally practicing sharing my 32 inch screen with my wife when she complains about screen real estate inequality in the house - hers is surface pro - but never come close to solving keyboard and mouse sharing.
jldugger 6y ago
I seem to recall Ubuntu had a similar thing for PCs to drive multiple X sessions (a classroom's worth?) off a single PC: https://help.ubuntu.com/community/MultiseatX https://help.ubuntu.com/community/MultiseatX But it seems to have gone by the wayside as the upper limit is really the number of video outputs, and driving 30+ displays off one computer starts getting into custom setups that are going to be more expensive, even if the goal was just running 30 instances of Firefox on one computer. The wiki hasn't been updated in 6 years, so I assume it's not viable in modern Ubuntu?
- Nightshaxx 6y ago
  Not sure about Ubuntu's support for it, but they may have just decided to leave it for virtualization OSs specifically made for this purpose. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LXOaCkbt4lI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LXOaCkbt4lI
- hawski 6y ago
  I did this on Gentoo around 10 years ago. It was quite cumbersome, but it worked. Separate X sessions in time of xorg.conf. The problem was with sound, I didn't know how to divide it, also removable media and danger of shutting down computer when another session was still running. Today it would be probably easier.
- numpad0 6y ago
  It's not done often, as not many people must run 30 individual desktop sessions on a single server box at the end of the day. Procedures are more or less same for every Unix or GNU/Linux systems. You somehow get dozens of display outputs, give Xorg with necessary config as to where to output and what input to watch, and run it. Unix and Linux are a multi-user operating systems so there's no inherent problem with it. Windows can do the same using the feature called Terminal Service. macOS Server had the same kind of feature years ago. On GNU/Linux, DisplayLink(not to be confused with DisplayPort) USB graphics adapters should work for this, or virtual framebuffers using Xvfb can be used to connect over VNC or RDP. Or some sort of PCIe hub can be used to connect grapevine full of Quadros. Whatever. The practicality problem of it is user experience tends to be rather suboptimal due to collectively massive issues, from network overheads, hardware acceleration issues or lack of support for it, workloads of sysadmin to constantly fighting outages, cost of client console hardware that aren't supposed to be full standalone computers but virtually it, etc.
  - csande17 6y ago
    The big issue with doing that sort of thing these days is that for the price of the specialized hardware you'd need, you can just buy mass-produced general-purpose computers.
    - mikestew 6y ago
      Hardware was what kept me from donning my Olde Guy hat and going on about how we used to have 20 serial terminals attached to a DigiBoard and a single System V machine, and by golly, we were glad to have it. It then occurred to me, "where am I going to find serial terminal hardware these days, and will it cost more than a WalMart laptop?"
- alex_duf 6y ago
  My class had that, but we were using remote session with dumb terminals, each terminal was wiped with the latest image at every boot.
vfinn 6y ago
That's a nice idea for someone with a big family, perfect usage for multi-core cpu too.
- netsharc 6y ago
  Linus has done a few of these, but with his $30000 budget, it's probably simpler to buy normal PCs: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LXOaCkbt4lI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LXOaCkbt4lI
  - vfinn 6y ago
    Thanks :). I was thinking of a configuration that would allow web surfing / school work etc. Should be quite cheap.
kilroy123 6y ago
Great idea. In the past I played with the idea of using netboot sever from my laptop. But this idea is better.
dijit 6y ago
wow, this reminds me of my earlier days (also poor) but I did it with an ancient 30gbp Nvidia card that had a TV output and put another X session on that display output. It surprises me that it works so well, but I think that the original technology was designed exactly for this.
Cthulhu_ 6y ago
I'm glad it worked for you in a personal setting. I know having VMs with thin clients is pretty common in office settings and schools, but I'm guessing they have dedicated hard- and software for it (Citrix I believe? It's been a while)
amelius 6y ago
Couldn't you have used a new user-account on the same computer, instead of using VirtualBox?
- aspaviento 6y ago
  > let us both browse the internet simultaneously It sounds like the idea was to use it at the same time.
  - amelius 6y ago
    Well, my Linux system allows two users to use the computer at the same time.
    - rrrrrrrrrrrryan 6y ago
      On one computer, with two mice and two keyboards and two monitors? That's what we're talking about here.
      - deleted 6y ago
        [deleted]
      - ben-schaaf 6y ago
        Yep. The thing to look for is multiseat-X. See https://help.ubuntu.com/community/MultiseatX https://help.ubuntu.com/community/MultiseatX
      - mixmastamyk 6y ago
        Timesharing was introduced in the early 60's and still supported by Unix-based systems. Windows has similar functionality but probably needs some addons. Virtualbox is one way around that. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compatible_Time-Sharing_System https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compatible_Time-Sharing_System
- netsharc 6y ago
  Without VirtualBox, all input and output devices are bound to the currently logged-in user (you can't tell Windows that another user should log in but their input/output come/go only to those devices).

techolic 6y ago

That's a brilliant idea! I was mentally practicing sharing my 32 inch screen with my wife when she complains about screen real estate inequality in the house - hers is surface pro - but never come close to solving keyboard and mouse sharing.

jldugger 6y ago

I seem to recall Ubuntu had a similar thing for PCs to drive multiple X sessions (a classroom's worth?) off a single PC: https://help.ubuntu.com/community/MultiseatX https://help.ubuntu.com/community/MultiseatX But it seems to have gone by the wayside as the upper limit is really the number of video outputs, and driving 30+ displays off one computer starts getting into custom setups that are going to be more expensive, even if the goal was just running 30 instances of Firefox on one computer. The wiki hasn't been updated in 6 years, so I assume it's not viable in modern Ubuntu?

Nightshaxx 6y ago
Not sure about Ubuntu's support for it, but they may have just decided to leave it for virtualization OSs specifically made for this purpose. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LXOaCkbt4lI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LXOaCkbt4lI
hawski 6y ago
I did this on Gentoo around 10 years ago. It was quite cumbersome, but it worked. Separate X sessions in time of xorg.conf. The problem was with sound, I didn't know how to divide it, also removable media and danger of shutting down computer when another session was still running. Today it would be probably easier.
numpad0 6y ago
It's not done often, as not many people must run 30 individual desktop sessions on a single server box at the end of the day. Procedures are more or less same for every Unix or GNU/Linux systems. You somehow get dozens of display outputs, give Xorg with necessary config as to where to output and what input to watch, and run it. Unix and Linux are a multi-user operating systems so there's no inherent problem with it. Windows can do the same using the feature called Terminal Service. macOS Server had the same kind of feature years ago. On GNU/Linux, DisplayLink(not to be confused with DisplayPort) USB graphics adapters should work for this, or virtual framebuffers using Xvfb can be used to connect over VNC or RDP. Or some sort of PCIe hub can be used to connect grapevine full of Quadros. Whatever. The practicality problem of it is user experience tends to be rather suboptimal due to collectively massive issues, from network overheads, hardware acceleration issues or lack of support for it, workloads of sysadmin to constantly fighting outages, cost of client console hardware that aren't supposed to be full standalone computers but virtually it, etc.
- csande17 6y ago
  The big issue with doing that sort of thing these days is that for the price of the specialized hardware you'd need, you can just buy mass-produced general-purpose computers.
  - mikestew 6y ago
    Hardware was what kept me from donning my Olde Guy hat and going on about how we used to have 20 serial terminals attached to a DigiBoard and a single System V machine, and by golly, we were glad to have it. It then occurred to me, "where am I going to find serial terminal hardware these days, and will it cost more than a WalMart laptop?"
alex_duf 6y ago
My class had that, but we were using remote session with dumb terminals, each terminal was wiped with the latest image at every boot.

vfinn 6y ago

That's a nice idea for someone with a big family, perfect usage for multi-core cpu too.

netsharc 6y ago
Linus has done a few of these, but with his $30000 budget, it's probably simpler to buy normal PCs: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LXOaCkbt4lI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LXOaCkbt4lI
- vfinn 6y ago
  Thanks :). I was thinking of a configuration that would allow web surfing / school work etc. Should be quite cheap.

kilroy123 6y ago

Great idea. In the past I played with the idea of using netboot sever from my laptop. But this idea is better.

dijit 6y ago

wow, this reminds me of my earlier days (also poor) but I did it with an ancient 30gbp Nvidia card that had a TV output and put another X session on that display output. It surprises me that it works so well, but I think that the original technology was designed exactly for this.

Cthulhu_ 6y ago

I'm glad it worked for you in a personal setting. I know having VMs with thin clients is pretty common in office settings and schools, but I'm guessing they have dedicated hard- and software for it (Citrix I believe? It's been a while)

amelius 6y ago

Couldn't you have used a new user-account on the same computer, instead of using VirtualBox?

aspaviento 6y ago
> let us both browse the internet simultaneously It sounds like the idea was to use it at the same time.
- amelius 6y ago
  Well, my Linux system allows two users to use the computer at the same time.
  - rrrrrrrrrrrryan 6y ago
    On one computer, with two mice and two keyboards and two monitors? That's what we're talking about here.
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
    - ben-schaaf 6y ago
      Yep. The thing to look for is multiseat-X. See https://help.ubuntu.com/community/MultiseatX https://help.ubuntu.com/community/MultiseatX
    - mixmastamyk 6y ago
      Timesharing was introduced in the early 60's and still supported by Unix-based systems. Windows has similar functionality but probably needs some addons. Virtualbox is one way around that. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compatible_Time-Sharing_System https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compatible_Time-Sharing_System
netsharc 6y ago
Without VirtualBox, all input and output devices are bound to the currently logged-in user (you can't tell Windows that another user should log in but their input/output come/go only to those devices).