1 Aug
2004
1 Aug
'04
5:54 a.m.
söndagen den 1 augusti 2004 04.51 skrev Joe Hartley:
On Sat, 31 Jul 2004 20:20:22 -0400
Chris Pickett <chris.pickett(a)mail.mcgill.ca> wrote:
At times I've run soundapps over VNC with great results. Infact, running VNC
to the local machine does infact improve lowlatency behaviour. Probably due
to hardware acceleration being basically disabled.
But, VNC has one big drawback, it can at the moment only export whole
displays, not separate programs. Integration wise it sucks.
Though I think I read somewhere that VNC (or possible tightvnc) is going to
support separate apps soon...?!
/Robert
--
http://spamatica.se/music/
Malcolm Baldridge wrote:
Chris has it correct, which often seems bass-ackwards to the way people
think of client/server stuff. The X server is what's running on the
machine with the display. The client app runs remotely (usually on a
server, complicating the terminology!) and displays on the server.
I'm coming in late to the conversation, but I absolutely agree that
while it's easier and more secure to remotely display X audio apps over
ssh, the processing power is often unacceptably high. Unless our terminologies are reversed: I usually
refer to the X
"server" side to be the remote, and the "display client" to be the
"local". My apologies if we're talking about it from opposite sides.
The X server is what you have on your machine. It handles display
requests from client applications (possibly run remotely).
At least, that's my limited understanding of how it's meant to work.