3 ms·
This could be made VERY interesting if you also add an NX server in the mix. I find basic X11 connections via ssh to be rather laggy and unpleasant to use when
by ivan_ah 13y ago
This could be made VERY interesting if you also add an NX server in the mix. I find basic X11 connections via ssh to be rather laggy and unpleasant to use when the internet connection is not top.
The idea behind NX is to "fake" an X client on the server side and fake a NX server on the client side. This reduces the number of roundtrips required for each action. The improved responsiveness is dramatic -- even on a low speed and high-latency link, using the remote desktop feels like a local machine...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NX_technology
Unfortunately, the two open source projects which aimed to reproduce the NX functionality seem to have been abandoned.
http://freenx.berlios.de/
http://code.google.com/p/neatx/source/list
Is anyone using NX these days? Perhaps, people stopped developing these because they work well already?
- rogaha 13y agoI didn't know NX! Thanks for suggesting it Ivan! I will try it !
- cpach 13y agoX2Go[1] is under active development and to my understanding it's based on NX libraries. It might be a good alternative. I have only tried it briefly and not over WAN, but it worked quite good over WLAN at least. [1]: http://wiki.x2go.org/doku.php/start http://wiki.x2go.org/doku.php/start
- morsch 13y agoWe're using NX/x2go for working from home or, sometimes but fortunately not too often, less likely remote places such as weekend holiday places. It does work well. I wouldn't go as far as saying it feels like a local machine, and it's not as responsive as regular X over a fast LAN, either. But it's very usable.
- sciurus 13y agoTake a look at xpra instead. The performance is much beter than X11 forwarding when you don't have a low latency connection. http://xpra.org/ http://xpra.org/