[moonmonkey]

I have a Mac mini server at home, I VNC into it (with the Screen sharing features of leopard) and use it like that.

Its it possible for two people to each vnc (or another tech) into different accounts simultaneously and use the gui??

Any ideas?

[besson3c]

I'm pretty sure the VNC protocol works by taking over the current GUI session, whereas alternatives such as NX and X11 forwarding establish a new session for that remote user. I would definitely look into NX (NoMachine), it is much faster than VNC anyway.

[moonmonkey]

Any ideas if NX works on a mac or iPhone OS, I can find a client for mac but not a server version.

[ghporter]

The degree of "simultaneous" would have to be very extreme, and I think it would also lock up or otherwise break the OS, at least for that session. I have no inside info, but the most common method of managing who is logged into an OS is to lock the login system as soon as someone has satisfied some amount of the logging process. This is done by locks, semaphores, and other programming techniques, but the granularity of even fairly old system processor instructions means that the two potential users would have to be so well synchronized that it's very hard to imagine it actually working. As soon as conflicting inputs arrived, the OS would have a seizure and freeze or panic.

[Atheist]

I was able to do this using OSXvnc on Tiger. It was a long time ago, not sure if it would work with Snow Leopard (or even Leopard for that matter). The trick is to have OSXvnc running under each user account you want to have accessing the box. In other words, the users already have to be logged in. Just setup OSXvnc to be listening on a different port for each user. If I'm not mistaken, there were instances where a message box would display on the wrong users screen but don't remember the circumstances.

[ghporter]

...so there's no real conflict because you're already logged into both accounts. That could work without too much trouble, as long as you enforced the different ports dodge. Still, that sounds like a lot of work.

[Atheist]

Originally Posted by ghporter 

...so there's no real conflict because you're already logged into both accounts. That could work without too much trouble, as long as you enforced the different ports dodge. Still, that sounds like a lot of work.

It really wasn't a hassle. All you have to do is make sure OSXvnc is setup to launch on login and make sure all appropriate users are logged in. (Plus the one-time setup of course.)

[moonmonkey]

Im still trying to get to work, will keep you updated.

The main reason for this:

At home I have a Media Centre Mac mini connected to the TV, at the moment me and my lovely wife connect with our laptops and iPhones via VNC to control the mac mini (itunes, iPhoto, playing movies etc), the speed with VNC over WIFI is fast enough to do most things.

I occurred to me that when this new iSlate / iPad comes out, if it's running iPhone os then Jaadu VNC will be able to control the mac mini perfectly, so I could replace her ageing laptop with the iSlate and if she ever needs more power she just vnc's into the machine.

The issue was I might want to do this too in the future, like having a dumb terminal and only having to ever upgrade the server, but this is only sensible if we can have multiple simultaneous logins.

[besson3c]

I'd definitely go with OSXvnc first, but if that doesn't pan out and you don't mind spending money you might want to check out this:

iRAPP | OS X Terminal Server | Mac Terminal Services

I've used OSXvnc before for single user access, the server can be started via a command line script by forking the daemon into the background:

/Applications/OSXvnc.app/OSXvnc-server &

If you were to create a startup script to run this command you'd have OS X VNC starting up automatically at boot. I don't know how it handles multiple users, I've never tried this. I bet that if it doesn't handle this within this single daemon you could startup another by putting the second daemon on an alternate port:

/Applications/OSXvnc.app/OSXvnc-server --help
2009-12-31 04:04:19.338 OSXvnc-server[1170:903] Main Bundle: /Applications/OSXvnc.app

Available options:

-rfbport port TCP port for RFB protocol
-rfbwait time max time in ms to wait for RFB client
-rfbauth passwd-file use authentication on RFB protocol
(use 'storepasswd' to create a password file)
-deferupdate time time in ms to defer updates (default 0)
-desktop name VNC desktop name (default "MacOS X")
-alwaysshared always treat new clients as shared
-nevershared never treat new clients as shared
-dontdisconnect don't disconnect existing clients when a new non-shared
connection comes in (refuse new connection instead)
-nodimming never allow the display to dim
(default: display can dim, input undims)
-maxdepth bits maximum allowed bit depth for connecting clients.
(default: bit depth of display)
-allowsleep allow machine to sleep
(default: sleep is disabled)
-disableScreenSaver Disable screen saver while users are connected
(default: no, allow screen saver to engage)
-swapButtons swap mouse buttons 2 & 3
(default: no)
-disableRemoteEvents ignore remote keyboard, pointer, and pasteboard event
(default: no, process them)
-rfbLocalBuffer run the screen through a local buffer, thereby enabling the cursor
(default: no, it's slow and causes more artifacts)
(WARNING - This option is Deprecated and will be removed soon)
-localhost Only allow connections from the same machine, literally localhost (127.0.0.1)
If you use SSH and want to stop non-SSH connections from any other hosts
(default: no, allow remote connections)
-restartonuserswitch flag For Use on Panther 10.3 systems, this will cause the server to restart when a fast user switch occurs (default: no)

(just showing you the full set of options in case some of these might be useful to you. I'm not really sure what sharing is all about).

the -rfbport option would allow you to startup a second daemon on a different port (you can't have multiple copies of the daemon competing for the same port). The default is 5900, so you could do:

/Applications/OSXvnc.app/OSXvnc-server -rfbport 5901 &

"daemon" is the Unixy way of referring to an application that provides a service, in this case VNC.

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by moonmonkey 

so I could replace her ageing laptop with the iSlate and if she ever needs more power she just vnc's into the machine.

Uhm, what kind of "power" would that be ?

Photoshop ?
iMovie ?

I'm not sure what you're trying to achieve, but chances are, if it needs power, a VNC solution via iSlate won't really be a good solution.

-t

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

Uhm, what kind of "power" would that be ?

Photoshop ?
iMovie ?

I'm not sure what you're trying to achieve, but chances are, if it needs power, a VNC solution via iSlate won't really be a good solution.

-t

Why not?

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

Why not?

Because the iSlate will be a very tedious way to perform the tasks due to it's lack of a mouse.

Photoshop and iMovie are NOT made to be controlled by a touchscreen.

I'm not trying to second guess Apple, but things like drag-and-drop via touchscreen will be considerably less efficient than when using a mouse.

Just look at the example of Copy&Paste implementation with the iPhone. It works, but is by far less efficient than if you have a real keyboard and mouse with which you can mark something and then Cmd+C / Cmd+V.

-t

[ghporter]

Originally Posted by Atheist 

It really wasn't a hassle. All you have to do is make sure OSXvnc is setup to launch on login and make sure all appropriate users are logged in. (Plus the one-time setup of course.)

If you're setting things up specifically to support those remote users, then I'd say that you're right about it not being a hassle.

[moonmonkey]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

Uhm, what kind of "power" would that be ?

Photoshop ?
iMovie ?

I'm not sure what you're trying to achieve, but chances are, if it needs power, a VNC solution via iSlate won't really be a good solution.

-t

It's not perfect for all tasks but Jaadu VNC in the iPhone made me realise that controlling OSX via multi touch is totally possible, if Apple made the MacOS more multi touch friendly it would be even easier.

for Photoshop iMovie etc. the mac mini has bluetooth, so you can use a mouse connected directly to the server.
My wife edited an entire home movie on the server over VNC (screen sharing feature on Leopard) so its doable.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

Because the iSlate will be a very tedious way to perform the tasks due to it's lack of a mouse.

Photoshop and iMovie are NOT made to be controlled by a touchscreen.

I'm not trying to second guess Apple, but things like drag-and-drop via touchscreen will be considerably less efficient than when using a mouse.

Just look at the example of Copy&Paste implementation with the iPhone. It works, but is by far less efficient than if you have a real keyboard and mouse with which you can mark something and then Cmd+C / Cmd+V.

-t

Wouldn't this depend on the size of the screen? I think you could do drag and drop pretty efficiently with a 12-15" touch screen, do you agree?

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

Wouldn't this depend on the size of the screen? I think you could do drag and drop pretty efficiently with a 12-15" touch screen, do you agree?

No, screen size is not a concern at all. Not even the refresh rate.

It's the GUI, and the limited ability to control the regular OS X GUI with multi-touch input. Sure, Apple could fix this and enable more multi-touch for OS X, but the main thing is that w/o a mouse, some tasks and apps are going to be very tedious to control, if not almost impossible.

-t

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

No, screen size is not a concern at all. Not even the refresh rate.

It's the GUI, and the limited ability to control the regular OS X GUI with multi-touch input. Sure, Apple could fix this and enable more multi-touch for OS X, but the main thing is that w/o a mouse, some tasks and apps are going to be very tedious to control, if not almost impossible.

-t

I'm not so sure. Many of us thought the same thing about putting OS X on a phone in general, yet Apple came up with some surprising new conventions for the original iPhone.

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

I'm not so sure. Many of us thought the same thing about putting OS X on a phone in general, yet Apple came up with some surprising new conventions for the original iPhone.

Please read my original post. I was specifically talking about those apps that need more power, like Photoshop or iMovie.

-t

[besson3c]

Because the iSlate will be a very tedious way to perform the tasks due to it's lack of a mouse.

Photoshop and iMovie are NOT made to be controlled by a touchscreen.

I'm not trying to second guess Apple, but things like drag-and-drop via touchscreen will be considerably less efficient than when using a mouse.

Confused... Obviously some rewriting of apps or additional support would be needed to make certain things work optimally, if that is where our miscommunication rests. I was addressing the usability aspects of using an optimized version of these apps on the iSlate, specifically the not having a mouse part.

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

Confused... Obviously some rewriting of apps or additional support would be needed to make certain things work optimally, if that is where our miscommunication rests. I was addressing the usability aspects of using an optimized version of these apps on the iSlate, specifically the not having a mouse part.

I was specifically talking to moonmonkey's situation where he said that for more powerhungry apps, he would VNC through the iSlate to the mini.

I said that the real powerhungry apps (like iMovie or Photoshop) will be (for now) not really usable given a touchscreen setup (w/o a mouse).

Currently, the REGULAR OS X GUI (which he wants to access via VNC) is not suited for touchscreen access.

Sure it can change, but that's the future. He was asking about a possible setup in the next months. Fact is, using the iSlate via VNC to use Photoshop on a more powerful machine will hardly be very efficient w/o a mouse in the near future.
Yes, you can make it work with touchscreen, but we are years off of a complete paradigm shift of how to change a mouse-based GUI to a touchscreen based GUI for real productive work and tasks like advanced Photoshop editing.

-t

[besson3c]

I would assume that when the iSlate comes out there will be an aggressive plan put in place to get apps working optimally for it since Apple will want to sell these.

Of course, it would be smart to wait and see what that plan is.

I do disagree that the mouse is the most ideal input device for Photoshop for the foreseeable future though, there are lots of users that use their Wacoms with the Adobe product line, aren't there? An iSlate would be similar but without the stylus, right?

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

I would assume that when the iSlate comes out there will be an aggressive plan put in place to get apps working optimally for it, since Apple will want to sell these.

Apple would want to sell these as VNC front-ends for Photoshop ?

Point is, Apple will make the iSlate work real well as a standalone product, not as a geek-crutch for something it was never meant to be (like VNC'ing Photoshop).

Originally Posted by besson3c 

I do disagree that the mouse is the most ideal input device for Photoshop for the foreseeable future though, there are lots of users that use their Wacoms with the Adobe product line, aren't there? An iSlate would be similar but without the stylus, right?

Minus (BIG MINUS) the precision.

I'm not saying the mouse is gong to be "it" 10 years from now.
But I'm saying it still will be "it" one year from now, certainly in the next months, when moonmonkey wants to make that purchase and commission the iSlate.

But since mm never clarified what those "power apps" are that he wants to access via the iSlate, this is a theoretical discussion anyways.

-t