19 Aug
2011
19 Aug
'11
2:26 p.m.
On 8/19/11 4:03 PM, Ethan Dicks wrote:
On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 4:53 PM, Dave
McGuire<mcguire at neurotica.com> wrote:
My experience with Sun framebuffers has been less than stellar.
There are some *very* good ones, but not common and not cheap. Plus,
every Ultra5 I've messed with was noisy as hell.
So, with a good network and a Linux/MacOSX/$UNIX VNC client, you can
get as good or better desktop performance remotely as you would running
X locally.
Doc
On 08/19/2011 04:45 PM, Ethan Dicks wrote:
Doc didn't suggest Windows..
No he did not, but I wanted to short circuit any answers resembling
"because VNC is easier to get working on Windows than X" type answers.
I really do want to know why VNC is better than X - specifically in
the environment of sitting on a machine that's already running an X
server and firing off X client programs on a SPARC box. What does VNC
get me that X doesn't? i.e. - why would I want to load something
that's not included out of the box. What's the payoff?
Honestly, with most any SPARC system, VNC is Your Friend.
Why is that better than X?