Related
Hi all,
Having a lot of problems trying to use a VNC server on my Vario 3.
I've installed PocketVNCServ 0.8.1-EN from pocketvnc.sf.net and its running listening.
Whenever I try to connect from my desktop to it (I've checked and the IP for my Kaiser is correct), and every time I get:
Code:
vncviewer PreferredEncoding=raw ZlibLevel=0 AutoSelect=1 169.254.2.1
VNC Viewer Free Edition 4.1.1 for X - built Sep 10 2007 17:17:04
Copyright (C) 2002-2005 RealVNC Ltd.
See http://www.realvnc.com for information on VNC.
Wed Dec 5 10:36:43 2007
CConn: connected to host 169.254.2.1 port 5900
CConnection: Server supports RFB protocol version 3.5
CConnection: Using RFB protocol version 3.3
TXImage: Using default colormap and visual, TrueColor, depth 24.
CConn: Using pixel format depth 6 (8bpp) rgb222
CConn: Using raw encoding
main: write: Connection reset by peer (104)
I've tried quite a few different connection parameters, auto detection, etc and none seem to work. I'm guessing its not matching the capabilities of the screen/resolution or something and giving up, can anyone give me a clue where I'm going wrong please?? I desperately need to get this working, and since I'm running under Linux cannot use the activesync solutions out there.
Cheers!
Andy
Do u have real vnc enterprise on the computer? They are really compatable with eachother. But idk about linux, works fine on Vista.
THis doesn't answer your VNC issue, but have you tried mymobiler.com ? Cool app (but for Windows, so you could try running it via Wine or in a VM session on Linux).
MyMobiler installs on Windows then on your next sync will install and connect to your phone. You can then pull your phone screen right up on your PC and control it as a window in Windows. Very handy.
I'll see if I can source vnc enterprise, but wasn't aware of any protocol differences between the software packages, something you're aware of?
And, unfortunately wine/crossover won't work with Activesync at all, due to many issues, so that isn't a possibility at present.
ekw, any chance you could enable debugging on your windows vnc client and see what encodings, screen resolution, etc it uses and I'll try to shove those settings into my vnc client by hand and see if it solves the problem??
ekw said:
Do u have real vnc enterprise on the computer? They are really compatable with eachother. But idk about linux, works fine on Vista.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No need for that - it works just fine with the free (!!!) TightVNC client, as has also been explained in http://wiki.xda-developers.com/inde...y) Pocket PC from another (desktop) computer?
BTW, as far as MyMobiler (and other alternatives) are concerned, I really recommend thoroughly reading the articles at http://wiki.xda-developers.com/inde... from both the desktop and the mobile device) - I've VERY thoroughly compared all these solutions to each other. ALL your questions will be answered in there.
Hi,
thanks for that, I'd already studied the wiki documents several times, and none referred to Linux compatibility, so was basing it around the TCP/IP methods.
It looks like the linux vnc clients operate very slightly differently to the Ultra/TightVNC clients for windows, as I tried this on a friends laptop and got a connection and remote control immediately.
So i used Crossover/Wine and installed UltraVNC to my kubuntu desktop, and sure enough that connected up and works fine.
I'll do some debugging to find what differences there are, as I should be able to easily use native linux VNC clients (its a transfer protocol underlying, so shouldn't be a compatibility problem).
So, I'll post back with further details as I'm sure others will want to do what I've been doing under Linux, as we're not all windows clones on our desktops ;-)
Hi, I got Vista Home Premium on my PC, its an OEM copy so as far as I know I can't use it with another PC. But, if I buy OEM Vista Ultimate will I be able to install it on the same PC?
I don't want to updgrade, I will be doing a fresh install on a formatted Hard Disk. But I just wondered if OEM versions (eg: Vista HP) send my motherboard serial number to Microsfot and prevent another copy of OEM (eg: Vista Ultimate) being installed on it. I don't want to run them at the same time either, just "swap versions" basically.
Thanks!
it would not be logical for ms to block it that way as it would result in them selling less copies
p.s. why get ultimate?
i ask because alot of people seem to go for the name more then the difference between them
unless one require the 64bit vista or want the
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/products/windowsvista/editions/choose.mspx
ms versions of what many other 3th party programs offer in a grater quality
then there really is no reason to get ultimate
it's not faster or better just extre included tools
Windows BitLocker Drive Encryption
* unless one have REALLY secret stuff then it's more trouble then it's worth slows the system down a bit
and if one have to reinstall one cant count on getting the encrypted data back
Remote Desktop Connection
* only really usefull for servers imho where one dont wish to have to go to the server room to mess about and then do it remotely from another pc
Windows Fax and Scan
*scanners always comes with software & Fax? is stoneage tech along with teletext on tv's--
Windows Complete PC Backup and Restore
*much better 3th party backup programs then anything with ms's name on it
I use a *cough* OEM version using acer certs (acer laptop) and I find I prefer ultimate because I have used it more than Home Premium which shipped with it.
Rudegar said:
it would not be logical for ms to block it that way as it would result in them selling less copies
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree, I'm just worried that no one else has tried this and I'll come across a problem.
Rudegar said:
p.s. why get ultimate?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I got Vista HP as soon as it was released. Then six months later I got Windows Home Server as soon as it was released. Turns out that Remote Desktop'ing from the web to your home PC (via Windows Home Server) is only possible with Vista Ultimate. A big annouance for Home Premium buyers.
There are some tweaks for Vista HP, but I am thinking I wil go down this route.
Vista Ultimate
Hi,
I have a copy of Vista OEM running on my home machine. It's not a problem although if you do change the hardware significantly (upgrade the BIOS, add CD drives) etc and then need to re-install it you may need to call Microsoft in order to activate it again. However, I've had to do this a couple of time with no problems from MS.
Actually you wont need to reactivate unless you change your mobo or its bios. but what i've done... i`ve patched the SLIC table in ACPI table in my bios, added Asus OEM certificate and now have ultimate (modified with vlite) which even passes WGA tests)) but if you buy a legal copy of ultimate, you can install it no matter what SLA information is in your bios
foaf said:
Turns out that Remote Desktop'ing from the web to your home PC (via Windows Home Server) is only possible with Vista Ultimate. A big annouance for Home Premium buyers.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not sure exactly how you are trying to do this, but I have no problems, using my Vista Home Premium Laptop to connect to my WHS box and use RDP... Are you sure that your WHS has the ports opened properly...?
" Remote Desktop'ing from the web to your home PC (via Windows Home Server) is only possible with Vista Ultimate. A big annouance for Home Premium buyers."
as far as i know it's also possible with business version of vista
but of cause that lacks mediacenter and such
So for those of you you want Remote Desktop "server" capabilities on your computer and want Vista Ultimate for that reason alone, check out:
http://www.missingremote.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1220&Itemid=232
-R
Thanks for all the replies.
@ debonairone - I'm talking about being at a 'kiosk' pc and visiting http://myserver.homeserver.com, and being able to remote desktop into my Vista PC. I can RDP to the WHS from within Vista.
@ sketchy9 - Thanks, that is the work around I mentioned before. Seems like a lot of tweaking for me.
sketchy9 said:
So for those of you you want Remote Desktop "server" capabilities on your computer and want Vista Ultimate for that reason alone, check out:
http://www.missingremote.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1220&Itemid=232
-R
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
:up: Yes, and that Remote Desktop and multiple sessions hack works wonderfuly on Premium........
........until one installs SP1. I won't be surprised if it'll only be a few weeks until a new RD dll hack is developed to resolve the SP1 changes.
If I install unbuto on my computer will I still have access to files allready on hard drive? Is is able to use my wifi etc.?
wifi should work, with jaunty. as for the files i believe anything but what is in itunes u can import. good luck!
I have a sneaking suspicion that you might want to first learn how to spell your chosen distro's name before attempting to make the leap from Windows to Linux.
gtrplr71 said:
If I install unbuto on my computer will I still have access to files allready on hard drive? Is is able to use my wifi etc.?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What does this have to do with the HTC Dream/TMobile G1 devices?
I have to agree that on first look, it does appear that the G1 is unrelated to ubuntu and linux...
However...after getting a G1 with it's open source OS and no longer needing the horrible mess that is activesync, I too have moved to open source on my desktop (well, laptop...) - I tried ubuntu but switched to Mint (which is based on ubuntu but I prefer it).
Android is so easy going that it'll work with any operating system and is one of the first phones I've had where it is an easy fit. I've even managed to sort out music syncing similar to itunes or Winamp for android and I'm well happy.
I very rarely boot into my windows partition any more and that is thanks to android.
As regards the question about accessing your files, yes, most of them will be compatible with linux equivalents but back everything up before you install it - in most cases, putting it on will require at the least, some messing with partitions on your disk which is inherently risky, and at worst, a total re-format.
I keep my windows around for games (C&C!!!) and very little else nowadays and am more than happy with linux.
So's my phone ;-)
if youre on vista it is a b*ich to partition since it takes up space it is not even using, but yea you should be able to keep youre files
Microsoft next operating system for PC's will be Windows 8, something which I don't wanna go and use.
They use the metro interface and I don't see in anyway how this is suited for power users and pc in general, its looks more suited for an tablet.
So for me its an reason for not even wanna test Windows 8, I will skip it and if I didnt use Windows for playing CoD MW3 then I would switch for sure, because with Linux you have many choices in desktop inviroments, like KDE, GNOME, XFCE and others.
Where I do find KDE the best, there interface is modern and they keep improving and bug fixing.
Ofcourse we saw how Ubuntu suddenly introduced unity as standard user interface and dropped GNOME, but atleast you have choices. And not to forget Linux is lighter then Windows and does not need virus scanner.
You can turn off the metro interface in settings and go back to default windows style.
Then I have an Windows 7 look or what? But they still force the interface default onto you, as you say I need to switch to the default Windows style.
Yes, it'll look like Win7 with a couple of new features and such. You can download the Preview now and test it for yourself.
But Windows is an operating system you need pay for. Unless you buy an new notebook, why would you upgrade to Windows 8?
Yes I can test it? But like you say if I put off metro interface its Windows 7 with a couple more features, that is also reason why I consider to switch to Linux, if you have an Xbox 360 or PS3 for gaming then the gaming is not an problem.
I also feel performance with Linux is better, boot time is faster also, but I don't dare to switch because I have one app called QQ that I use to communicate and I already tested in an virtual machine how the video chat off webQQ 3.0 works, it will give receiver and link which you can see the person using webQQ.
I would switch if it wasnt for game part and this one app called QQ.
- QQ(Web)
- QQ for Linux
You can use WINE for gaming. You can check which games works with Wine here
Windows 8 has been written mainly with touchscreens in mind, hence the metro interface. If it's not a touchscreen device then you turn off metro and use it like standard Windows, but with new features. Personally, I don't see any difference between going from Windows 8 to Linux or going from Windows 7 to Linux. Basically, Windows to Linux is what we're talking about here and it's like asking if you prefer apples or oranges. I like both, but I don't have a favourite. I'd rather have both so I can pick and chose what suits at the time.
LordManhattan said:
- QQ(Web)
- QQ for Linux
You can use WINE for gaming. You can check which games works with Wine here
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes I check Wine database before I do something drastrical, because my GPU also needs https://github.com/Bumblebee-Project/Bumblebee
So I know that wine can solve it, but in case off QQ and CoD MW3 it does not work. The Linux version off QQ only exists because the Chinese goverment putted pressure on Tecent to make an client for Linux.
Right now it doesn't even has an reason to exist, because using WebQQ 3.0 gives you more features then the Linux version, but I tested it and you can use video chat in WebQQ but your contact will get your video in an webbrowser, not in her or his QQ window.
So I tested it all before even installing Linux, because really I like KDE, but how are you going explain to your friends, sorry you need start using Skype with me because there is no good QQ client with proper video chat for Linux.
For OSX there is, so hackintosh is possible.
Both Windows and Linux are different platform and used for different purpose.
So its not like going to Linux, if Windows fails.
For something you need Linux, and for something you need Windows.
And for something you need Mac OSX too.
There you wrong in, all can be used as desktop operating system, the only difference is you probably use other apps for certain tasks.
So will you use iTunes for music on OSX, but in Linux you will use another app which offers same functionality.
Only thing what is still an fact is that Windows is better if you like use your pc for gaming, Linux does not have many games, osx is the same story but there are still more games for OSX then Linux.
I can name an list off app which you can use on all three.
Firefox
VMWare
Virtualbox
Skype
VLC
Chrome
Handbrake
Sabnzbd+
And for most Windows software you will find alternatives, but IM software can be sometimes an problem. Like Gimp is an alternative for photoshop and Gimp can also be used on Windows.
But its true that you will find some software not on Linux, but you can always use wine for trying the Windows software and wine is not an emulator.
DexterMorganNL said:
There you wrong in, all can be used as desktop operating system, the only difference is you probably use other apps for certain tasks.
So will you use iTunes for music on OSX, but in Linux you will use another app which offers same functionality.
Only thing what is still an fact is that Windows is better if you like use your pc for gaming, Linux does not have many games, osx is the same story but there are still more games for OSX then Linux.
I can name an list off app which you can use on all three.
Firefox
VMWare
Virtualbox
Skype
VLC
Chrome
Handbrake
Sabnzbd+
And for most Windows software you will find alternatives, but IM software can be sometimes an problem.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The main things I use Windows for are:
Visual Studio
Sony Acid
Sony Sound Forge
Adobe Creative Suite
None of them have suitable alternatives on Linux - not even close. Some of them will partially function under Wine but that's not enough.
There is definitely the argument that you do need Windows for some things, but I can't think of any reason why I need Linux over it. (I do use both - I have my PC dual boot Windows 7 and Ubuntu 11.)
In fact, you can't avoid any OS's
For .NET programmers, there is no other choice than to use Windows.
For Android ROM/Kernel compiling, then Linux is mandatory.
For iPhone app development (XCode?) then I guess Mac is mandatory.
I'm no fan off dual booting, because I have expensive GB's ( SSD's ). But yes sadly on video editing there is not any powerfull program for Linux.
But there are some opensource video editors which I think are not bad, maybe you never heard off the one I'm to name now.
http://www.kdenlive.org/
Video editor for Linux, I think its very good, don't know how far it is now but last time I used it was good for editing video.
I made this AMV with it in 2007
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xjgixJc-rE8
But it depends, sometime you really need Windows or OSX ( Just use osx86 ), but most times the average user does not need it.
Maybe i'll reinstall windows 7 or buy a mac. because i'm not the biggest linuxfan..
Sent from my MK16i using xda premium
Since when do people pay for windows!! :O looololololololol
Sent from my GT-I9000 using xda premium
kevin2516 said:
Since when do people pay for windows!! :O looololololololol
Sent from my GT-I9000 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I do indirect because you get an license for Windows 7 home premium if you buy an notebook. An notebook without Windows on it would be more expensive for sure.
Linux die hards would want it without this license and apply for a refund, but honestly this time I choose not to do that and keep the license because I use Windows 7 now.
I got an refund from dell for Windows 7 home premium, but I could use the license afterwards still.
I think I would switch back to Win 7 instead.
W7 is most likely going to be the next XP, as in there are likely to be companies demanding it's availability in 10 years time.
I support several companies which insist on XP.
Every few years I dabble with Linux and I've yet to be impressed.
I dual boot with Ubuntu 11.10 and it has many failings over Windows.
Take support for Exchange, previous versions used Evolution but 11.10 comes with Thunderbird. Evolution is only good if you're not running anything newer than Exchange 2003, so while I can use it to access my personal email on my 2003 server, I can't connect to work as they use Exchange 2010.
Just been round a friend's house today and he's moved onto Ubuntu at home because he has to deal with Windows all day at work. Discovered that even though the screen had timed out (PC hadn't been touched for a couple of hours) he was able to open a terminal session before the screen then dimmed and locked, so great security there.
The title of this thread shouldn't be a question, it should be a statement aimed to persuade.
xaccers said:
W7 is most likely going to be the next XP, as in there are likely to be companies demanding it's availability in 10 years time.
I support several companies which insist on XP.
Every few years I dabble with Linux and I've yet to be impressed.
I dual boot with Ubuntu 11.10 and it has many failings over Windows.
Take support for Exchange, previous versions used Evolution but 11.10 comes with Thunderbird. Evolution is only good if you're not running anything newer than Exchange 2003, so while I can use it to access my personal email on my 2003 server, I can't connect to work as they use Exchange 2010.
Just been round a friend's house today and he's moved onto Ubuntu at home because he has to deal with Windows all day at work. Discovered that even though the screen had timed out (PC hadn't been touched for a couple of hours) he was able to open a terminal session before the screen then dimmed and locked, so great security there.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Exchange is something from Windows, ofcourse you have an chance with trouble if you use exchange on an non windows operating system.
Tho I'm a PC guy, I am still the family techie. So when my uncle called me and asked me to help him run windows programs, which he hasily defined as "work stuff", onto his Mac ( 15" 4:3 core 2 duo MacBook Pro w/ Lion) I said I'd help.
I knew of a couple different ways to do it - bootcamp, parallels, wine, vmware, ect- and after a little Googling, I called him back and asked him about dual booting Windows 7. He would really rather avoid having to power down his computer and boot it back up whenever he needed to run his software, but he wouldn't mind having to buy a seat of W7 if it would make it work hassle free after I set it up.
So, of the avalible options, what would give the best overall system performance? I may end up doing this on his i7 iMac as well, if he likes whatever I do.
I know there are Mac users here, so I hope you can help.
wine http://www.winehq.org/
Or parallels. It will run a windows environment on top of Mac OSX
thanks for the answers guys, but i know what the options are. I was wondering, from someone who has experience, which works best? Surely there's one that works easier or faster than the others?