<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META NAME="Generator" CONTENT="MS Exchange Server version 6.5.7226.0">
<TITLE>RE: Moving dnssd to kdelibs</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<!-- Converted from text/plain format -->
<BR>
<P><TT><FONT SIZE=2>-----Original Message-----<BR>
From: Friedrich W. H. Kossebau [<A HREF="mailto:Friedrich.W.H@Kossebau.de">mailto:Friedrich.W.H@Kossebau.de</A>]<BR>
Sent: Wed 12/1/2004 9:08 PM<BR>
To: kde-core-devel@kde.org<BR>
Subject: Re: Moving dnssd to kdelibs<BR>
<BR>
Am Mittwoch, 1. Dezember 2004 20:21, schrieb Aaron Seigo:<BR>
> On December 1, 2004 8:53, Jakub Stachowski wrote:<BR>
> > - random idea I just got (not even started yet) for easy launching remote<BR>
> > apps (not whole session): add new submenu to standard k-menu: 'K -><BR>
>> > Remote application -> (list of hosts) -> (normal k-menu for every host)<BR>
>> > '. List of hosts could be populated by searching for _remoteapps._tcp<BR>
>> > (advertising location of /usr/share/applications and ssh port) or<BR>
>> > something similar.<BR>
>><BR>
>> i don't think this would be very efficient, really. a better way might be<BR>
>> to add support for mDNS to the FreeNX server and client. this would solve<BR>
>> the big issue of how to do automatic discovery for NX on the network. it<BR>
>> could also advertise applications that the NX admin has approved for use<BR>
>> over the network, and that should be a bit more controllable/efficient.<BR>
>><BR>
>> what do you think?<BR>
<BR>
> As FreeNX is not spreaded everywhere today and does not support single<BR>
> applications<BR>
<BR>
Of course it does! Who said otherwise? How come you are repeating an<BR>
unsubstantiated statement?<BR>
<BR>
So here is a summary:<BR>
<BR>
* NX supports full desktops as well as single application windows<BR>
displaying remotely.<BR>
<BR>
* NX is considerably faster and more responsive in both these<BR>
profiles (full desktop and single app) than plain vanilla remote<BR>
X, or compressed X, or VNC, or SunRay, or Tarantella -- and it<BR>
has even a slight edge over MS RDP and Citrix.<BR>
<BR>
* In full desktop mode, NX is even more fast than in single app mode.<BR>
The reason is these:<BR>
<BR>
--> single app mode benefits from NX caching and NX compression<BR>
(which is better than any other known X compression method --<BR>
-- compared to generic ZLIB it is a factor of 10, while<BR>
consuming only 10% of ZLIB's CPU cycles).<BR>
<BR>
--> full desktop mode benefits from the same to technologies,<BR>
*plus* the near-complete roundtrip supression. Plain X11 apps<BR>
produce many many roundtrips, making the user experience "slow"<BR>
and unresponsive.<BR>
<BR>
Roundtrip suppression for single app mode is on NoMachine's roadmap<BR>
(and even partially implemented). What it takes is to create a<BR>
"rootless" nxagent (which is derived from Xnest). The current<BR>
nxagent's rootless mode is not yet stable and leads to crashes.<BR>
<BR>
However, even without this feature, NX is still the fastest way to<BR>
display a single app X11 window across a network connection under<BR>
all conditions (its speed is of course more distinct over slow and<BR>
latency-ridden links). It certainly is faster than plain X11, than<BR>
DXCP-compressed X11 or gzip-compressed X11 (and it is SSL encrypted).<BR>
And it is stable.<BR>
<BR>
It is just slower than the same application embedded in a complete<BR>
NX desktop.<BR>
<BR>
So most people who saw NX as complete remote desktop display or<BR>
Desktop Terminal Server application, tend to be a bit disappointed<BR>
when they try the single window mode (after all, it saves real<BR>
estate on the screen, no?) and think this is all NX can do.<BR>
<BR>
The single app speedup by bringing roundtrip suppression to that<BR>
mode will surely come sometime in the future.<BR>
<BR>
IIRC, NoMachine even have recently even offered a "bounty program"<BR>
for people who are interested in developing this as OpenSource/GPL<BR>
(they seem to have not enough time for this currently, and as you<BR>
know yourself, real X11 experts who know what they are doing are<BR>
very few on this planet).<BR>
<BR>
I hope this clears up the fog around the topic.<BR>
<BR>
A different question is about *kNX*. kNX may have a few bugs regarding<BR>
single app mode for NX sessions, and definitely has many missing<BR>
features. For those who don't know: kNX is the KDE NX Client hosted in<BR>
kdenonbeta, created during last LinuxTag more or less as a "proof of<BR>
concept".<BR>
<BR>
Hopefully this will soon become a shiny little gem on the KDE desktop.<BR>
Currently it isn't. It is the result of a quick (but brilliant) hack<BR>
over 2 days in last June. Unfortunately jowenn didnt have any time to<BR>
devote to it due to his university obligation.<BR>
<BR>
> (or is this in the stable release meanwhile?) such a simple<BR>
> support for launching single remote application via traditionell<BR>
> X might be very welcome by some. Promoting FreeNX next to it is of<BR>
> course a good idea, too :)<BR>
><BR>
> Friedrich<BR>
<BR>
Cheers,<BR>
Kurt<BR>
<BR>
</FONT></TT>
</P>
</BODY>
</HTML>