4 ms·

this got me thinking. instead of buying a new mac every 2 years (about 600$+ a year + transition labor I guess), I would rather just use my current mac, and str

this got me thinking. instead of buying a new mac every 2 years (about 600$+ a year + transition labor I guess), I would rather just use my current mac, and stream into a VM with the latest mac running on really good hardware and use that as a saas. is this a thing?

martinald 6y ago
Not possible really. MacOS has terrible remote desktop software which is really laggy and generally crap even on gigabit FTTH. They all seem to be based off VNC, instead of something closer to Windows RDP which seems to be a lot smarter in how it sends it over (I cannot notice I'm on RDP most of the time). It also has loads more features (for example, it can change resolution dynamically as you go into full screen instead of being static), handles audio well, etc. I could be wrong on this - would be interested to hear if anyone has had a better experience.
- mrtksn 6y ago
  I wouldn't agree. I often connect to my GF's Macbook to help her out with a code or something like that. You can't watch a video but it is phenomenal to work together on the same thing because it's very easy to connect and has a phenomenal audio link that it feels like you are in the same room. There's almost nothing to mess up, unlike the 3rd party conferencing and desktop sharing software that every time someone is not getting the sound/can't share the desktop/can't unmute the mic. BTW where I live currently, 4Mbps upstream is considered good and the remote desktop works fine on this connection.
  - martinald 6y ago
    This is what I mean though. You can't watch a video. This works flawlessly on RDP on Windows (will be a little compressed if you are on lower bandwidth). It's a fairly major problem if you're using it as your primary machine. Have you tried RDP? It is miles ahead of anything else I've seen.
    - mrtksn 6y ago
      I have not but I guess if I want to watch a video, why not stream it or download it on my actual machine?
      - easton 6y ago
        What if you use the system as your only computer, using other devices as thin clients? Windows/Linux has tons of different ways to optimize for this (RDP with acceleration, Citrix, LTSP/X forwarding), whereas the Mac doesn’t. Which is fair, Apple didn’t design the OS to be used that way, but it’s an annoying drawback.
      - fakedang 6y ago
        I assume the difference will be more prominent if you go into other applications such as cloud gaming. As an addendum, I ran Cyberpunk on my beaten down 4 year old ThinkPad 420 via an EC2 instance (specifically to test out the hypothesis) and it was faster than my usual usage on it.
- yjftsjthsd-h 6y ago
  Dumb question - on assorted Linux or BSD OSs you can run xrdp against a VNC server. Would that work on a mac?
  - martinald 6y ago
    I don't think so, but I could be wrong. RDP on windows is accelerated (uses the clients graphics card) which makes it much more faster than VNC. VNC just basically sends a load of images of the screen in quick succession. It doesn't know really anything about the contents of them.
agloeregrets 6y ago
I think technically speaking Mac Stadium does that. Pretty pricy vs just buying and restoring from time machine. It’s arguable that the needed Mac gains to be worth it are probably more like every 3-4 years and you are throwing most of that away in Remoting in. The M1 is an inflection point too, I would just argue to buy a new Mac mini each time they update it (once every 4 years or so).

martinald 6y ago

Not possible really. MacOS has terrible remote desktop software which is really laggy and generally crap even on gigabit FTTH. They all seem to be based off VNC, instead of something closer to Windows RDP which seems to be a lot smarter in how it sends it over (I cannot notice I'm on RDP most of the time). It also has loads more features (for example, it can change resolution dynamically as you go into full screen instead of being static), handles audio well, etc. I could be wrong on this - would be interested to hear if anyone has had a better experience.

mrtksn 6y ago
I wouldn't agree. I often connect to my GF's Macbook to help her out with a code or something like that. You can't watch a video but it is phenomenal to work together on the same thing because it's very easy to connect and has a phenomenal audio link that it feels like you are in the same room. There's almost nothing to mess up, unlike the 3rd party conferencing and desktop sharing software that every time someone is not getting the sound/can't share the desktop/can't unmute the mic. BTW where I live currently, 4Mbps upstream is considered good and the remote desktop works fine on this connection.
- martinald 6y ago
  This is what I mean though. You can't watch a video. This works flawlessly on RDP on Windows (will be a little compressed if you are on lower bandwidth). It's a fairly major problem if you're using it as your primary machine. Have you tried RDP? It is miles ahead of anything else I've seen.
  - mrtksn 6y ago
    I have not but I guess if I want to watch a video, why not stream it or download it on my actual machine?
    - easton 6y ago
      What if you use the system as your only computer, using other devices as thin clients? Windows/Linux has tons of different ways to optimize for this (RDP with acceleration, Citrix, LTSP/X forwarding), whereas the Mac doesn’t. Which is fair, Apple didn’t design the OS to be used that way, but it’s an annoying drawback.
    - fakedang 6y ago
      I assume the difference will be more prominent if you go into other applications such as cloud gaming. As an addendum, I ran Cyberpunk on my beaten down 4 year old ThinkPad 420 via an EC2 instance (specifically to test out the hypothesis) and it was faster than my usual usage on it.
yjftsjthsd-h 6y ago
Dumb question - on assorted Linux or BSD OSs you can run xrdp against a VNC server. Would that work on a mac?
- martinald 6y ago
  I don't think so, but I could be wrong. RDP on windows is accelerated (uses the clients graphics card) which makes it much more faster than VNC. VNC just basically sends a load of images of the screen in quick succession. It doesn't know really anything about the contents of them.

agloeregrets 6y ago

I think technically speaking Mac Stadium does that. Pretty pricy vs just buying and restoring from time machine. It’s arguable that the needed Mac gains to be worth it are probably more like every 3-4 years and you are throwing most of that away in Remoting in. The M1 is an inflection point too, I would just argue to buy a new Mac mini each time they update it (once every 4 years or so).