I-Appliance BBS
The Official Source for Internet Appliance Upgrades and Mods
Amazon Honor System Click Here to Pay Learn More
BBS Main List | Sign In | Sign Up | Search | Help | Linux-Hacker.netReply to Thread | Printer |

Home / Other I-Appliances / Virgin Webplayer
Frustrated with the webplayer performanc? Get your webplayer to perform like a PC...it is possible

New MessageFrustrated with the webplayer performanc? Get your webplayer to perform like a PC...it is possible (modified 0 times) bluenevus
Profile
I've tried the overclocking and was successful on some of my WP some not so great...see the overclock geode thread. Cutting a hole for the fan in the case sucked. Mounting a grill sucked even more. Soldering my WP sucked. The performance still sucked. I guess the whole experience sucked. Anyway, I love the form factor of my WP so I was determined to get some performance out of it. So here is what I did...I went to terminal services. Oh yeah Microsoft terminal services (citrix is way to expensive and requires MS terminal services what a rip off) http://www.microsoft.com/windows2000/downloads/recommended/TSAC/default.asp

I have each WP on a Netgear 101c (flawless operation) booting to a very bare WinME running Terminal service (just placed the shortcut in the start folder and it will boot to terminal service) on boot. I get to run windows 2000 at the speed of my server (only 1.1gig bug far faster than WP). Thats right! I boot to what looks like winme then it goes into terminal services and runs a different desktop, my win2k server. It is not pc anywhere or win vnc, they are slow to say the least. Probably worse than WP alone. The greatest thing is that in full screen mode you can't even tell you are running a seperate os. The only bottleneck is the video. Though I can watch divx, dvd and stuff I can't watch it full screen. That is not a limitation of terminal service, it seems to happen only in my WP. None the less everything else runs all my desktop application at full 1.1gig speed. The greatest thing is my WP is only processing network, keyboard strokes, mouse inputs and video...nothing else. My server takes care of the rest.

Thats right thin clients and they are and awsome at that. If you have windows XP it should have remote desktop built in otherwise you can install it from your cd. If you have windows 2000 advanced server you can run it in administrator mode and make a few simultaneous connections (maybe 5 all administrators?). You cannot run terminal services in application mode (up to 90 days) without paying for the license of which is way, way too expensive for home use. The administrator mode doesn't require additional licensing. And of course, XP is built in but can only take 1 connection.

07-09-2002 19:10:05

New MessageRE:Frustrated with the webplayer performanc? (modified 0 times) IHackum2
Profile | Email
Well since running a remote desktop back to a desktop PC does nothing to actualy increase the performance of the Webplayer, you really did nothing but waste a small chunk of the bandwidth of this website.

We are all dumber for having read it.

07-10-2002 06:45:24

New MessageRE: (modified 0 times) sheepdog
Profile
I disagree.

He may not have boosted its performance, your right, but it may do its job faster.

If nothing else though its another option.

Hey, Blue, how about a walk through?

Nice job.

07-10-2002 08:05:24

New MessageRE: Get your webplayer to perform like a PC...it is possible (modified 0 times) icepick72
Profile
Kudos to bluenevus, new ideas are what these boards are all about.

Icepick72

07-10-2002 08:48:11

New MessageBLAH! (modified 0 times) IHackum2
Profile | Email
Theres not much to it.

1) If you have Windows 2000 server or Windows XP on your desktop machine, turn on Remote Desktop (under XP) or terminal services (under 2K)

2) Install "Remote Desktop Client" off the Windows XP install CD (or get it off the web) on your Win 95/98/ME box.

3) On the Win 95/98/ME box go into your SYSTEM.INI and replace SHELL=EXPLORER.EXE with SHELL="Name and location of remote desktop client software"

4) Reboot machine.

3) Connect to your desktop machine across the network.

Tada! You have now not really done anything to make your Webplayer faster, just attached to another computer which you could have just as easily walked across the room to use.

So once again I say that his post does nothing to make the webplayer faster.

07-10-2002 10:14:05

New MessageRE:Frustrated with the webplayer performanc? Get your webplayer to perform like a PC... (modified 0 times) Lucubrate
Profile
Yes the topic is not completely accurate, nor is it a new concept, but I think you missed the point of his post. If you have the WP downstairs with a wireless net, this will give you the processing power of your server upstairs. In effect, it is faster. Easily walking across the room, up the stairs, across the street or to some other location is not necesarily 'easy'.

I bet there are many people that benefit from someone talking about this use of a WP. I don't think the post was dumb or a waste of bandwidth. Your comment about it being dumb and a waste of bandwidth on the other hand...

07-10-2002 16:38:25

New MessageRE: Get your webplayer to perform like a PC...it is possible (modified 0 times) wildcard
Profile
I like the post, and I learned from it. And I'd like to learn more.

The original post describes starting from a very minimal ME instal on the webplayer. How do I get to a very minimual install, that is, do I
1) upgrade to ME from the 98 lite version that many of us are using, by attaching a CD Rom with the ME install disk?
Or do I,
2) create a small install of ME on a extra hard-drive, and then use M-system tools to move it to the web player?
or
3) some third option I can't figure out.

4) Is the terminal service program available for 98, so that I don't need to bother with ME?

peace

07-10-2002 23:14:02

New MessageRE:Frustrated with the webplayer performanc? Get your webplayer to perform like a PC...it is possib (modified 0 times) DSPTECH11
Profile
Faster? I really don't think that Windows XP could run as fast as it does remotely as it would if it was installed on the Webplayer directly. This is exactly why I wanted one of them super expensive Webpads that I couldn't afford. I love being able to access my PC from the Webplayer wirelessly (is that a word?). Anyways I want to thank bluenevus for an excellant idea. I really liked my Webplayer before reading this thread but now I completely love it!

For those of you running Windows XP that want to do this without having to attach a CD-Rom...
Download this file http://home.earthlink.net/~dsptech1/webplayer/remotexp/remote.zip and copy it over to your Webplayer. Unzip and install by doubleclicking the setup.exe file. Now you either have to add a new user to your users folder in Administrative tools, Computer management,Local Users and Groups, Users from the Control Panel on your XP box, Or you must be using a password with your own profile to access your profile remotely (I'm using my existing profile). Start Remote Desktop Connection from the webplayer and type in the name of your XP Box (network name for your system). Type in your profile name and password and wait for your desktop to to load.

Don't expect to run any 3D games, or movies. I tried to watch TV and man was it droppinfg frames. Still cool to see and have access to everything on you system. You also won't be able to use your PC at the same time.

I hope that I didn't miss any steps since this is the first time I have ever done anything like this. Most of you will be able to figure out the missing pieces or can ask for help if you get stuck. BTW, I'm typing this on my Webplayer using Netscape 7 remotely.

Good luck.

07-11-2002 02:15:50

New MessageRE:Frustrated with the webplayer performanc? (modified 0 times) tomkarlo
Profile
How about this:

Install Linux on a server and on the webplayer.

Run Xserver or VNC (you can even VNC to a windows server.)

It's free, legal, and you can do everything (winamp, video, email, web) that you would want to do on windows with a WP anyway.


See my Virgin Webplayer Project & other hacks
http://karlo.org/projects/
07-11-2002 09:25:13

New MessageRE:Frustrated with the webplayer performanc? Get your webplayer to perform like a PC...it is possib (modified 0 times) preacher
Profile | Email
>Run Xserver or VNC (you can even VNC to a windows server.)<

VNC is slower than this method. I've used VNC on my WP to access the server at the other end of the house, and it was slower than I wanted. After reading the post, I was able reconfigure my WP and away I went.. Very fast (at least for the WebPlayer). My server is an Athlon1300 running WinXP Pro, Webplayer is using Win98Lite.

07-11-2002 09:37:45

New MessageRE:Frustrated with the webplayer performanc? (modified 0 times) tomkarlo
Profile
Yeah, but you're wasting a whole Athlon 1.3 Ghz machine just to make your $40 WP run faster. I can run both of my WebPlayers off my single, Celeron 850 Linux server, while also serving mp3s and running web site off it -- and to the WebPlayer users, it looks like they're on a totally seperate system.

VNC vs RDP should be a wash if things are set up right. In fact, a lot of VNC clients can do RDP, and vice-versa... the protocols are largely equivalent, from what I understand. If you're finding VNC slow, you may have the compression or depth settings incorrect. I certainly can't tell any speed difference between the two over a 11 Mbs network - they should both be totally snappy.

07-11-2002 11:00:21

New MessageRE:Frustrated with the webplayer performanc? Get your webplayer to perform like a PC...it is possib (modified 0 times) mevanson
Profile
To call it a waste of a 1.3 GHz machine is a bit inaccurate. If you're win2k box runs the server version, you can use the win2k box for terminal services and other purposes at the same time. You can even have to terminal service sessions. This is different from the standard release of VNC that controls the visible desktop. (there is a version on vnc that will allow interaction with terminal server so that you get a different session).

Just wanted to clarify you can do much the same thing with win2k and terminal services as with VNC.

07-11-2002 16:25:39

New MessageRE:Frustrated with the webplayer performance? (modified 0 times) chaezewhiz
Profile | Email
Well, the biggest plus for VNC+linux is the price.

What would a B$A/M$ legal win2k server cost Joe hacker along with the per client cost? Is it true only the
WinXP professional can be the server? One good thing though is that you can install the client software
from the XP Professional CD (msrdpcli.exe) on anything past Win95.

Anyway, I will agree that VNC server on a windows box for terminal serving is slower (since VNC was originally
a *nix only program).


-chaeze (no flame intended, just a cheap ass *nix hacker)


Miracle in a Can
07-11-2002 19:14:06

New MessageRE:Frustrated with the webplayer performanc? Get your webplayer to perform like a PC...it is possib (modified 0 times) preacher
Profile | Email
>Yeah, but you're wasting a whole Athlon 1.3 Ghz machine just to make your $40 WP run faster.<

It would be a waste if that were all I was using it for, but seeing as it also acts as the router for my home-office network, is a HomeSeer gateway, is my file & print server as well as serving the cause in the search for ET , it is not a waste, but a way to use an already existing resource to drastically increase the performance of another resource.

07-11-2002 21:40:30

New MessageRE:Frustrated with the webplayer performanc? (modified 0 times) mbcook
Profile
Well, correct me if I'm wrong but isn't this exactly what X-Windows is designed for? That would make things run faster (sorta). Just run a X client on the WP and all the applications on a linux box, etc elsewhere.
07-12-2002 06:56:27

New Messageduh!! (modified 0 times) mbaha
Profile
Using terminal services or any remote desktop connection program is really what the webplayer was designed, look at all the boundless devices.

Anyway get a computer that can play a divx movies and mp3’s and toss it behind your TV then use the webplayer to connect to it and play movies and music ect.

Or to play with this stuff

http://www.nirvis.com/index.html

http://www.smartlinc.com/1101p.html

mbaha


hack your own you will love it more
07-12-2002 14:32:17

New MessageRE:Frustrated with the webplayer performanc? (modified 0 times) bluenevus
Profile
I have to say I love the performance of my WP on terminal services. I will not dignify IHackum2's comment. You really have to try it out yourself. I am an IT manager and use technology of all kinds. Win VNC, Citrix and RDP. Hands down, there is no comparison to RDP. Winvnc may work on a 100mbit network but any where else it is horrible. When I go to my back yard and my wireless is at 2mbit, winvnc is pathetic. RDP is a little slower than it was at 6mbit but not much. You have to read about the technology and make the decision for yourself. http://www.microsoft.com/windows2000/downloads/recommended/TSAC/default.asp

I am not a big microsoft fan but I must say this is the best thing they ever made. That is if they really designed it and did not steal it from citrix or something. I must say citrix requires rdp to run. Anyway, there are so many variables that I encourage you to read the link above then download the msi package if you please.

To enable in XP go to system-properties-remote and check remote desktop
To enable in win2k server, go to add programs then add windows components. Make sure you install terminal service in administrator mode. Application mode requires licensing and will turn off in 90 days if not purchased. Sorry for the lame walk through but I think the hyperlink above does a much better job than I can.

Follow the instructions on client install from above (hyperlink). When setting up make sure you use client connection tools and create a new connection there. You should connect at your highest resolution (800X600 for you WP) and check full screen. This will make sure that it runs in full screen mode and you only see the server desktop, no lines or hint of your resident os running.

I have a wide range of computing hardware in my house, some fast, and some slow the WP. I don't care either way because they all boot to my terminal server. I administer 1 computer (the server) and all the clients get to run whatever is installed there. I don't care about configuration, transfering files or anything else. There really isn't much network traffic...a few k for the keyboard and mouse and about 100k for the graphics back. RDP uses a much more advanced caching schema so that not a lot of data is being sent from the server. Let me tell you, at work I have skeptics all day until I connect to Korea from Texas to administer the server on a 56k dial up. Try that winVNC...thats right it is nearly impossible. Don't think about PC anywhere. Maybe Xterm.

I use my one of my WP downstairs next to the television. Tvguide website is running at all times. The screen saver runs which happens to be family pictures. Everyone awes at the digital picture frame. Then they really trip when they see the screen activated and TVguide is there. Then I play MP3s from my server jukebox upstars with thousands of songs that output to my stereo downstairs. Yep it is convenient. The other WP is in pieces for hacking and testing new mods (would like serial connection for my GPS). The last WP is mounted in my car. I have mapping software installed along with much much mp3s. Since I have a wireless network, I can transfer files from my server upstairs to my car. Thanks to all the walls, it is a whoping 2mbit. My next mission is to find a serial to USB adapter so I can mount my GPS to the WP (unless I can make a serial connection). I have a remote RF mouse remote that facilitates navigation through the apps (hot keys for winamp and stuff) without a keyboard (which is stowed in the glove compartment).

Anyway, that is off the topic. The topic is misleading but who would read "make your wp a thin client?" It was designed as a thin client by makers of thin clients boundless. You cannot compare perfomance of win xp installed versus terminal service. hands down terminal service is far faster unless you have a 1mbit network. The wp doesn't have the processing power for XP though it may work...read the specs. The geode is pentium class put comparible to a pentium 133. mhz isn't the only thing that makes a processor fast, it is the architecture, staging, registers and cache. To say the least, geode architecture sucks except for its power consumption. I say make your own conclusions that fits your needs. Thats what is important and not what any of us thinks. Bahh humbug to the pessimists. The fun of owning this WP is finding the many ways to tweak, hack, mod, and overclock or just find damn cool things to do with them.

Enjoy, Enjoy, Enjoy

This is supposed to be fun :)

Frank

07-12-2002 19:40:06

New MessageRE:Frustrated with the webplayer performanc? Get your webplayer to perform like a PC (modified 0 times) bluenevus
Profile
Oops let me clarify before the IT attack begins...yes RDP is a standard and others do use it. A key component of Terminal Server is the protocol that allows a "super-thin client" to communicate with the Terminal Server over the network. This protocol is based on International Telecommunications Union's (ITU) T.120 protocol, an international, standard multichannel conferencing protocol. When I talk about RDP I am specifically talking about Microsoft's implementation of RDP 5.0 from terminal service in win2k and winxp from any win32 client.

Frank

07-12-2002 19:49:25

New MessageRE:Frustrated with the webplayer performanc? (modified 0 times) tomkarlo
Profile
> Well, correct me if I'm wrong but isn't this exactly what X-Windows is designed for? That would make things run faster (sorta). Just run a X client on the WP and all the applications on a linux box, etc elsewhere. <

True, but Xwindows requires that you then run an X-server on the client, which is not always a small deal... at the same time, that's basically what you're doing with Windows Terminal Server too. I'd argue that neither of them is truly a "thin" client because in both cases you're still running an operating system on the local machine then layering a client application over that (more so in WTS than X.)

One option I think we're ignoring, and that I've been trying to implement, is the use of Linux Terminal Server (ltsp.org) or Mandrake Terminal-Server. They offer the potential to simplify life tremendously -- your client-side data is reduced to less than 1.5 megs (talk about easy to fit on a DoC) and all of the X server, etc is loaded from the Terminal Server. A true "thin-client."

07-16-2002 07:36:54

New MessageRE:Frustrated with the webplayer performanc? Get your webplayer to perform like a PC.... (modified 0 times) boosted
Profile | Email
I'm going to give remote desktop a try. However, I do not have the hardware nor the software to be running a server all day long. Is there a way to do it under w2k professional instead of server? The machine is slow enough to be running w2k professional, I can't imagine it running server. Plus I don't really want to reinstall all my apps again.

-boosted

07-23-2002 08:23:48

New MessageRE:Frustrated with the webplayer performanc? Get your webplayer to perform like a PC...it is (modified 0 times) mgrab
Profile
Frank,
It sounds like you are qualified, and know what you are talking about. Let me qualify my statements. I run VNC all day and all night long. Okay, not quite, but a lot. (How's that?)
WinVNC definitely could use some work, and actually somebody is making a version that will run much faster. It emulates a video card installed in the machine. That way, only real updates are passed to it, and it doesn't have to poll the screen. That being said, the current VNC implementations have different speeds. For example, using my 800Mhz duron linux box to connect to a winvnc box over my 144k dsl line from home is faster than using my 800mhz(or something) intel PIII windows box to connect to the same winvnc box while at the office on the lan. That's weird. Additionally, TightVNC rules. I can connect using my 144k DSL line to a linux vncserver with a linux vncclient with TightVNC at 1280x1024 and it screams. It is actually as fast as being there. I don't know if the tightVNC client would make the webplayer run slow though. But a webplayer running a lean linux TightVNC client, connecting to linux TightVNC server should run very well.
Matt


Jack talk Thai very well.


--To know Jesus is the reason for life.
07-25-2002 22:21:26

New MessageFrustrated with the webplayer performanc? Get your webplayer to perform like a PC...it is possible (modified 0 times) bluenevus
Profile
Boosted,

I'm not familiar with any other implementation of RDP 5 beyond Windows server and XP pro. I tried to find all the dlls and stuff for RDP recompile them and install. Didn't work. I think my problem is registry settings because I'm pretty sure all the components are there. I don't know if some of the dlls are looking for win version to operate. I tried taking apart my win2k server and xpro components. No avail sorry. I don't mean to insult you but when you say "I don't have the power to run win2k server" I take it you don't have a pentium 233 pc with 64mg of ram? Terminal server runs on win2k server or XP Pro on a regular pc and your webplayer uses your current os (any win32 and yes 16 bit also) with the terminal service client (432k) either app or ocx to connect to the server.

Matt,

Thanks, I'll have to take another look at winVNC. I don't know if it is because I didn't implement it from my linux box. I implemented winvnc from win to win. I wonder if that is the problem. Because Win to Win was sure slow. Maybe I'll try from Linux to win and get the same results. For others that don't have win2k server or xp pro, winvnc under linux to win may be an awsome solution. I believe the common denominator is that we all agree we can achieve much, much more performance from our webplayer when we implement it as a thin client. By the way, when you run winvnc in linux does it take the full screen i.e. no borders? RDP in full screen mode doesn't have any borders or hint of the underlying os. it looks, feels and behaves just like a resident desktop.

Frank

07-27-2002 07:36:22

New MessageRE:Frustrated with the webplayer performanc? Get your webplayer to perform like a PC...it is po (modified 0 times) mgrab
Profile
Frank, yes, vncviewer --fullscreen will run VNC in fullscreen mode. One other feature, if your linux rig is configured not to process ctrl-alt-delete and other special win keys, you can send those keystrokes straight to the windows box. VNC is great, but, it won't print locally, or play sound locally. But hey, it IS free.
Matt
07-29-2002 20:10:37

New MessageRE:Frustrated with the webplayer performanc? Get your webplayer to perform like a PC... (modified 0 times) jhd3rd
Profile
Just wanted to put this out there in case someone else has an ATI All-In-Wonder. Installing terminal services on your box will prevent the video output (TV tuner and vid capture) from working on the All-In-Wonder. Just so there is no confusion, I mean it doesn't work on the local server, even if no remote clients are connected. If you try to open the ATI TV app, you get an error, something like "Capture device not found". Uninstalling terminal services fixes the problem. I wish ATI would fix this problem, it's not like I wanted to watch TV on my remote terminal anyway, but for for now it doesn't work.
07-30-2002 06:56:52

New MessageRE: Get your webplayer to perform like a PC...it is possible (modified 0 times) neo_tweeker
Profile
I am new to this terminal services thing. I was wondering if there was any way to run a terminal service VNC or whatever on a Win XP machine so that my webplayer could connect to it without everything I'm doing on the webplayer popping up on the machine. Basically I want to be able to use the webplayer connected to that computer while the other computer can still be used at the same time. Any help?
Thanks
HeSSy
09-23-2002 01:40:01

New MessageUse NTSWITCH (for 2K Pro users) (modified 0 times) gr8_brit
Profile
Booster,

Make your Windows 2K Pro into the Server Version!

Check out NTSWITCH at:

http://www.astalavista.com/tools/network/misc/

And yes, it does work!

Cheers,


gr8_brit
09-25-2002 10:15:54

New MessageRE:Frustrated with the webplayer performanc? Get your webplayer to perform like a PC (modified 0 times) zmoz
Profile
I beleive that is actually legal too...
09-25-2002 14:40:51

New MessageTerminal Services (modified 0 times) W2KCLIENT
Profile | Email
Just my 2 cents worth. I use both my WP and an Epod1 web pad via terminal services. The terminal service works flawlessly and you get the power of your server right on the screen of your WP. I have used TS for better than a year and it barely taxes my P3 933, I am still running a single processor at present. Plus you can download for free the citrix software as long as you have a legit W2K server license. You can throttle the cpu utilization based on the client signed in, so you don't have to worry about tying up the server for low priority request. I have tried VNC and an X server previously, but terminal services beats them hands down. I run home automation software from my wireless web pad and cruise the house just like I was sitting in front of the server, while my server spools mp3's to my digital audio receiver and processes other request all with out a hickup. You can't go wrong with ts.
09-25-2002 17:40:45

New Messagelocal peripherals.. (modified 0 times) TheBigDog
Profile
ok, I have a question. I have an application that I would like to run in my thin client (i.e. Webplayer) However the application communicate w/ a device via the com port. If I install the MS client and run the application via the Server (win2k), will the software see the com port in my thinclient (webplayer in this case) or will it actually be looking for the device on my server's com port?

I am fully aware of the fact that my webplayer doesn't have a com port yet. However, it is the concept that I am wondering about. I would imagine it will look for the peripherals on the client side, but I just want to double check w/ the experts out here.

Thanks in advance.

09-26-2002 09:34:55

New MessageNTSwitch (modified 0 times) TheBigDog
Profile
another questoin, if I switch from win2k pro to win2k server (registry hack), do I still need the original win2k server CD to install the Terminal Service??
09-26-2002 09:52:22

New MessageTerminal Services questions (modified 1 times) W2KCLIENT
Profile | Email
It is my understanding, although I am not an expert on W2K server, that I/O directed to the com port is sent to the thin client. I have a Firecracker that I have not yet moded into my Epod so I can't tell you first hand if I/O is sent to the thin client com port. There is an option when setting up terminal services to disable the com and lpt ports. However, let me tell you what I have tried. I had a CM11A x-10 interface hooked up on my server. I attempted to use Homeseer from my Epod1 via ts running off my server. Problem is W2K server would not send the I/O to the com port on the server. Yet, when I hooked the X-10 interface to my XP Pro system and used my webpad via (ts) remote desktop to it, the x-10 commands where sent to the controller. Now it may be that W2K server has some compatibility issues with Homeseer. I also have an ATI All-in-Wonder Pro card in my server and tv playback is null and void while W2K server is installed. So it maybe a limitation of W2K server. In reference to your second question: ts is an additional part of W2K server and has to be installed from the CD.
09-27-2002 14:38:04

Reply to Thread | Printer |
All times are PSTPowered by UltraBoard v1.62



Copyright © 2000, Netmake Inc. All Rights Reserved.
See Terms and Conditions for more information.




i-opener opener laptop notebook computer help drivers dll free windows dos repair fix linux mac macintosh 2000 95 98 nt pc configure hardware software sound video netscape explorer network networking lan wan software cmos fat bios printer card mouse modem ide scsi cd rom controllers scanner tape hard drive cgi scripts source code mp3