View Single Post
Capt'n Corrupt's Avatar
Posts: 3,524 | Thanked: 2,958 times | Joined on Oct 2007 @ Delta Quadrant
#2978
Originally Posted by yorkey View Post
Ive used VNC in various forms for years. Recently mostly to manage my SageTV server from my normal desktop.

For this kind of access, copying files, editing files etc VNC works fine on a local network. As soon as the screen starts changing a lot, streaming video, flash, etc, VNC is just not effecient enough even on a local network.Edit: actually small displays are OK, but forget full screen SD resolution stuff and there's no sound of course!

Also tried VNC over the internet. This lags a lot even for basic tasks. Mind you Ive only got an ADSL connection with only 40k upload at the end Im controlling.

There are more effecient solutions than VNC though. One Ive been using at work recently is Citrix. Works well, bit complicated for home use of course, but you can arrange for things like streamed video and flash to actually be decoded on the local machine rather than having to transfer the decoded, and so much larger, screen from the other end.
Thanks a bunch! This is great information.

It would be nice if there was an alternate open system that optimized this sort of thing. I suspect that with video compression, progressive resolution and specifically sending sections of the screen that have changed (omitting the ones that haven't), it may be possible to stream a high quality desktop on a very small amount of bandwidth.

I am of course assuming that VNC is a brute-force approach to sending a screen (which is probably incorrect). Still, if citrix is smoother, it suggests that there is room for VNC to improve.
 

The Following User Says Thank You to Capt'n Corrupt For This Useful Post: