But I thought that all Mac software uninstallation was "just drag the application to the trash". Now it turns out that's not the case, even for Apple's own applications?
Apple almost did this right. Now what they need to add to it is to be able to log into a 2nd (or 3rd, 4th) user account by simply connecting a second monitor and keyboard to the host computer. No additional computer required. .... And to compensate for the loss of the sale of the 2nd computer Apple could charge some premium for the OS's capability to support that. (I've been trumpeting this for a long time now, and just maybe it's coming.)
Apple will have been trying many different combinations of technologies in their R&D, it'll be interesting to see which ones they end up marketing. I do believe Apple would like to sell lots of lower power machines, combined together in some way and probably including a higher power machine.
I think it was quartz 3D (extreme?) that first attempted to more effectively separate the graphics and cpu functions - such that the graphics could be very powerful but required a relatively lower bandwidth between the cpu and graphics (lower still is >1Gbps iirc). While this was touted as a way of taking the pressure of the bus, this scenario could have also been used to allow multiple graphics workstations connected to a single cpu. It wasn't, but it could have been, and the same thoughts may have evolved.
Xgrid was a way of passing off the heavy processing to another Mac. Theoretically then a low powered Mac needing higher processing power could just ask another computer could do it. Imagine a low end terminal (perhaps same processor as MBA?) running standard apps, but passing off processing to an i7 when necessary. But it wasn't used in this way - and the data throughput to pass off the process really needed to be huge to make it viable.
I still think Apple wants to do something like that though. Low cost terminals with high responsiveness, using a central powerful computer to give them lots of power. I'm not sure if it's to make a big push into the PC market at a low price without sacrificing their margins (as most computer companies have), or perhaps they just envision a house with 5-10 touch-screens as standard (some fixed, some wireless)... in the kitchen, or replacing wherever a phone would once have been.
They need better high speed connections - all Macs have the highest speed networking they can and now Thunderbolt might be doing something for this. I am surprised that the remote desktop solution isn't faster though - it should be sending through minimal instructions on what to draw and letting the client do that.
Anyway, I do hope to see something like this happen.
Is Apple's VNC implementation reliable for other AI members? For some reason, I can only get it to work for a day or two and then it stops responding so that I have to either ssh or physically go to the computer and restart the service. I've not been able to get it work for several days for Tiger, Leopard or Snow Leopard.
I can Screen Share all my Macs except my main one (2 year-old iMac) -- it won't accept the password.
It stopped working about 6 months ago -- I am waiting for Lion, rather than reinstall Snow Leopard.
But I thought that all Mac software uninstallation was "just drag the application to the trash". Now it turns out that's not the case, even for Apple's own applications?
ARD client isn't just an app, it's an integrated part of the operating system, not meant to be permanently uninstalled.
Great news! This would allow multiple Windows users to work with Mac only software without tying up a Mac exclusively. If you think about it, this could allow Windows users to "switch" to Mac OS X without buying a Mac.
I donno. You still have to buy the mac to allow windows users to connect to. Sounds like a very smart "in" to me on the part of Apple.
You would also want to route the sound from the remote system to the one you are sitting at. Microsft's Remote Desktop Connection client can do this.
Thanks for pointing that out. Sound is essential. Indeed, what is needed for remote operation is that the user has access to all the peripherals, one would expect at an independent workstation.
This would therefore prevent using a Windows PC or iOS client to utilise this feature.
...
As far as I am aware, Apple have not provided their VNC 'enhancement' for other people to implement in to their VNC clients.
[B]Lureware{/B] -- Great opportunity for Apple to make a (subtle nagware) Windows client.
But what if Apple, of all companies, decided to make such a client one of the optional downloads, available from the QuickTime/Safari/SoftwareUpdate/MacOSXclient installer for Windows?
If orchestrated properly, the added functionality to run MacOSX software, including the complete MacOSX login experience, could actually increase interest in the platform, rather than keep Windows users from buying new Macs in order to get access.
A moderate, almost invisible amount of nagging and hinting at additional native features, may just pull off the trick.
In the end, people want their own computer for territorial reasons.
For any of us familiar with Terminal Services (now called Remote Desktop Services) or Citrix, and the way it integrates with the Remote Desktop Client (ICA Client for Citrix), will know that what Apple has come up with is very much a "Work In Progress". Even the Microsoft Remote Desktop Client for Mac and the experience it gives you with video quality, remponsiveness, audio, redirection of devices etc, is a far more feature rich and functional solution than what Apple has on offer at the moment.
Add to this the fact that Lion appears to have introduced a large number of bugs to the mix, when using VNC clients to connect, and even the WIP statement begins to look stretched. At this rate Apple's remote desktop environment is going to be several years off what has been available on the Windows platform for several years already.
Comments
But I thought that all Mac software uninstallation was "just drag the application to the trash". Now it turns out that's not the case, even for Apple's own applications?
Where do you come up with this crap?
Apple almost did this right. Now what they need to add to it is to be able to log into a 2nd (or 3rd, 4th) user account by simply connecting a second monitor and keyboard to the host computer. No additional computer required. .... And to compensate for the loss of the sale of the 2nd computer Apple could charge some premium for the OS's capability to support that. (I've been trumpeting this for a long time now, and just maybe it's coming.)
Apple will have been trying many different combinations of technologies in their R&D, it'll be interesting to see which ones they end up marketing. I do believe Apple would like to sell lots of lower power machines, combined together in some way and probably including a higher power machine.
I think it was quartz 3D (extreme?) that first attempted to more effectively separate the graphics and cpu functions - such that the graphics could be very powerful but required a relatively lower bandwidth between the cpu and graphics (lower still is >1Gbps iirc). While this was touted as a way of taking the pressure of the bus, this scenario could have also been used to allow multiple graphics workstations connected to a single cpu. It wasn't, but it could have been, and the same thoughts may have evolved.
Xgrid was a way of passing off the heavy processing to another Mac. Theoretically then a low powered Mac needing higher processing power could just ask another computer could do it. Imagine a low end terminal (perhaps same processor as MBA?) running standard apps, but passing off processing to an i7 when necessary. But it wasn't used in this way - and the data throughput to pass off the process really needed to be huge to make it viable.
I still think Apple wants to do something like that though. Low cost terminals with high responsiveness, using a central powerful computer to give them lots of power. I'm not sure if it's to make a big push into the PC market at a low price without sacrificing their margins (as most computer companies have), or perhaps they just envision a house with 5-10 touch-screens as standard (some fixed, some wireless)... in the kitchen, or replacing wherever a phone would once have been.
They need better high speed connections - all Macs have the highest speed networking they can and now Thunderbolt might be doing something for this. I am surprised that the remote desktop solution isn't faster though - it should be sending through minimal instructions on what to draw and letting the client do that.
Anyway, I do hope to see something like this happen.
Is Apple's VNC implementation reliable for other AI members? For some reason, I can only get it to work for a day or two and then it stops responding so that I have to either ssh or physically go to the computer and restart the service. I've not been able to get it work for several days for Tiger, Leopard or Snow Leopard.
I can Screen Share all my Macs except my main one (2 year-old iMac) -- it won't accept the password.
It stopped working about 6 months ago -- I am waiting for Lion, rather than reinstall Snow Leopard.
But I thought that all Mac software uninstallation was "just drag the application to the trash". Now it turns out that's not the case, even for Apple's own applications?
ARD client isn't just an app, it's an integrated part of the operating system, not meant to be permanently uninstalled.
I can Screen Share all my Macs except my main one (2 year-old iMac) -- it won't accept the password.
It stopped working about 6 months ago -- I am waiting for Lion, rather than reinstall Snow Leopard.
VNC actually uses a separate password to your user password doesn't it? If so I assume you checked that?
I haven't used it in a year or so, using Logmein instead.
Great news! This would allow multiple Windows users to work with Mac only software without tying up a Mac exclusively. If you think about it, this could allow Windows users to "switch" to Mac OS X without buying a Mac.
I donno. You still have to buy the mac to allow windows users to connect to. Sounds like a very smart "in" to me on the part of Apple.
You would also want to route the sound from the remote system to the one you are sitting at. Microsft's Remote Desktop Connection client can do this.
Thanks for pointing that out. Sound is essential. Indeed, what is needed for remote operation is that the user has access to all the peripherals, one would expect at an independent workstation.
...
This would therefore prevent using a Windows PC or iOS client to utilise this feature.
...
As far as I am aware, Apple have not provided their VNC 'enhancement' for other people to implement in to their VNC clients.
[B]Lureware{/B] -- Great opportunity for Apple to make a (subtle nagware) Windows client.
But what if Apple, of all companies, decided to make such a client one of the optional downloads, available from the QuickTime/Safari/SoftwareUpdate/MacOSXclient installer for Windows?
If orchestrated properly, the added functionality to run MacOSX software, including the complete MacOSX login experience, could actually increase interest in the platform, rather than keep Windows users from buying new Macs in order to get access.
A moderate, almost invisible amount of nagging and hinting at additional native features, may just pull off the trick.
In the end, people want their own computer for territorial reasons.
[B]Lureware{/B] -- [I]Great opportunity for Apple to make a (subtle nagware) Windows client.
Apple's not into half-functional demos.
In the end, people want their own computer for territorial reasons.
So they can buy their own Mac. What's the problem here?
Add to this the fact that Lion appears to have introduced a large number of bugs to the mix, when using VNC clients to connect, and even the WIP statement begins to look stretched. At this rate Apple's remote desktop environment is going to be several years off what has been available on the Windows platform for several years already.