Many of these packages also optimize the code to provide efficient, secure commercial applications that can connect - and remotely manage - any host of environments across a network.
While it’s generally free*, several developers have taken to writing feature-rich versions of VNC to address some of the more prominent shortcomings of the application, such as adding native 128-bit AES encryption, file transfer capabilities, and even chat functions between the client and servers. VNC, while trademarked by RealVNC, is available in many different versions from multiple developers, each utilizing RFB as the underlying communication protocol. Unlike other remote desktop protocols, where efficiency is key to speedier communications, the RFB protocol sends raw data in an uncompressed form, which utilizes more bandwidth from end to end. The smaller the character space, the easier the password is to crack.Īnother minor, but important issue to take note of is the overhead in the data transmission between the server/client. Adding to this detriment is an 8-character limit imposed on the password by some VNC applications. Passwords are not sent in plain text across the network, so it’s possible to sniff them out by using a packet inspector. This is a wonderful feature for sysadmin tasked with supporting heterogeneous networks of Windows and OS X nodes alike, since VNC makes it possible to manage Windows devices from OS X and vice-versa.Īlas, it’s also VNC’s design that is cause for its greatest concern, as VNC was not initially written with security in mind. VNC has been developed in many flavors, providing support for Apple, Windows, and Linux just to name a few. Perhaps the greatest benefit of VNC is in its design as a platform-independant protocol. Some router configuration may need to be performed in order to get VNC to communicate across the WAN, plus tweaks to Firewall settings. VNC works just as well on LANs as it does over WANs, making it a boon for those wishing to provide remote support from offsite locations over the internet.
It includes the VNC Server, or computer that’s sharing its desktop the VNC Client, or computer that’s viewing / interacting with the server’s desktop and the RFB protocol, which is used to communicate commands between the server/client. Based on the RFB protocol, it was initially designed to perform in conjunction with a thin client, eventually becoming the three-prong application it is today. VNC by RealVNC is one of the more mature remote protocols available for remote access. Without further ado, let’s compare both of these great products in depth. Each boasts similar base features and provide for a simple-to-use workspace to aide in managing the systems of any organization, large or small. No technology better conveys this than remote desktop access.īut which application is better? The two best examples of this currently are Virtual Network Computing (VNC) and Apple Remote Desktop (ARD). Using technology to leverage the one (or few IT) against the hundreds (or thousands) of end users and their devices helps us to perform incredible feats of sysadmin strength.
However, like I always say, “work smarter, not harder.” Some veteran technology staffers say that IT is a young man’s game, with increasing help desk calls and growing support ratios - all that running around can be exhausting. Jesus Vigo compares and contrasts two remote desktop applications based on the RFB protocol used by VNC to determine which package works best for remote administration. The Macs are in my lab, all on a 100BaseT hub with no firewall or NAT in between each other.VNC vs ARD: Which is better for remote administration? I tried 1024x768 res, same result.Īlso, in case it makes a difference - I have the Sharing/Firewall on, Services Personal File Sharing, Remote Login - SSH, Apple Remote Desktop, Apple Remote Events, and Network Time allowed. Along those lines the G4 has the factory installed video card and the LCD display is in 1280x1024 res. KR - that's good to know - the G4 does have a monitor, keyboard, and mouse attached. Is the G4 headless? Curtain mode only works on machines with monitors attached. This should have upgraded the ARD client to v3, right? I haven't found a way to verify the ARD client version (suggestions gladly received!) except the recorded version number in - which lists 3.000000 as the version, which I'm assuming means v3.0 KR - good question, I created the client package via Create Client Installer in ARD and manually installed it on the G4. Have you upgraded the client (G4) to 3.x? 2.x is the default installation. All the systems are running OS X 10.4.8 and see below on ARD version. Thanks for your comments Brian - I'll answer each:Ĭurtain mode should work on any system running 10.4 and ARD 3.
0 kommentar(er)
