Windows equivalent of X-Windows?

[Fox5]

So, XWindows for Linux is pretty awesome. Being able to forward individually apps (even 3d) at full quality while greatly reducing bandwidth requirements is the hot stuff, and I way prefer it to full desktop forwarding protocols like VNC.
Thing is, it's Linux only. Is there anyway to accomplish the same thing in Windows? Rdesktop seems functionally similar, but it forwards the entire desktop instead of just a single app. Is there anyway to get it (or something else) to forward just a single window to be worked on?

 

[ViRGE]

There is none. It's a fundamental feature of the X-Windows system* that isn't implemented in Windows or Mac OS X.

* I could probably write a small book on why it's a stupid feature, too

 

[JackMDS]

Originally posted by: ViRGE

* I could probably write a small book on why it's a stupid feature, too

It is not so much a matter of stupid.

When coming to the whole wide world and especially the business world there many instances of particular specific needs that can be met in a certain way, and x-windows might be one of this private examples.

People read about it, they understand the words and it sounds good to them, however they do not have a clue about the technology behind and thus come with question like this.

As an example, thousand of people are still amazed why they do not get strong WIFI all over their 80 feet long house while the Data Sheet of the devices states few hundred feet indoor.

 

[Crusty]

Originally posted by: ViRGE
There is none. It's a fundamental feature of the X-Windows system* that isn't implemented in Windows or Mac OS X.

* I could probably write a small book on why it's a stupid feature, too

I use it regularly, I'd hardly call it stupid

At home I use X-forwarding over SSH to control my HTPC via my laptop, although mostly for music because it's far easier then trying to dig through a PVR GUI with my remote to find that one song I wanted to play. Having my XMMS gui on my laptop, but sound coming from my receiver is a great thing all without having to muck around with some outdated and abandoned plugin for XMMS that might or might not work

 

[RebateMonger]

Windows Server 2008 has this feature built-in. It's called Application Publishing. I've played with it. It was easy to get working with the two or three applications I tried. One of the nice things about it is that you can use it on multiple-monitor desktops, while traditional Remote Desktop/Terminal Server is pretty much a single-monitor application.

There are third-parties that have made software to do this, too. Citrix might have it, but I haven't used Citrix in a while.

 

[xSauronx]

Originally posted by: ViRGE
There is none. It's a fundamental feature of the X-Windows system* that isn't implemented in Windows or Mac OS X.

* I could probably write a small book on why it's a stupid feature, too

stupid feauture?

it was designed that way from the start. its not a stupid feature...its a key design element.

Originally posted by: Crusty
Having my XMMS gui on my laptop, but sound coming from my receiver is a great thing

this is one of the things i used to do until i upgraded to a better laptop and got an external hard drive. hell, if i could have built the atom box i wanted id be doing it *now*, among other things. X-over-ssh is nifty stuff.

Originally posted by: RebateMonger
Windows Server 2008 has this feature built-in. It's called Application Publishing. I've played with it. It was easy to get working with the two or three applications I tried. One of the nice things about it is that you can use it on multiple-monitor desktops, while traditional Remote Desktop/Terminal Server is pretty much a single-monitor application.

There are third-parties that have made software to do this, too. Citrix might have it, but I haven't used Citrix in a while.

We use novel (6.5, i think, it runs on top of Server 2003) here at school and it supports an application server. stuff that gets heavily used (ex: Office) doesnt go through it (i suspect due to a lack of bandwidth and server power) but a number of other things do that are only required for a handful of classes.

not exactly the same, at least not in this implementation, but its a similar idea.

 

[Fardringle]

It's not exactly what you are looking for, but UltraVNC can switch between full screen and single window monitoring.

 

[Nothinman]

* I could probably write a small book on why it's a stupid feature, too

It would be a very small book because while the implementation isn't awesome the feature itself is great.

We use novel (6.5, i think, it runs on top of Server 2003)

NetWare runs on Linux now and before that it was it's own OS that booted from DOS. Windows was never involved except for the client piece.

here at school and it supports an application server. stuff that gets heavily used (ex: Office) doesnt go through it (i suspect due to a lack of bandwidth and server power) but a number of other things do that are only required for a handful of classes.

My guess would be that you just have a Windows terminal server or Citrix server with the Novell client installed.

 

[ViRGE]

Originally posted by: Nothinman

* I could probably write a small book on why it's a stupid feature, too

It would be a very small book because while the implementation isn't awesome the feature itself is great.

Sure, but it's stupid because it ruins just about everything else. A lot of the deficiencies in Linux GUIs such as poor shared 3D performance, little video acceleration, and general wonkiness are a direct result of the need to keep arcane features like forwarding working. The sensible thing to do would be to move some of the graphics subsystem in to the kernel, but that would break stupid features like forwarding, and the long-beards would never have that.

But anyhow, I digress.

 

[xSauronx]

Originally posted by: Nothinman

We use novel (6.5, i think, it runs on top of Server 2003)

NetWare runs on Linux now and before that it was it's own OS that booted from DOS. Windows was never involved except for the client piece.

*shrug* that came from the building admin i work under. he admits he doesnt like it, and that he doesnt know it terribly well. anyway, its 6.5

here at school and it supports an application server. stuff that gets heavily used (ex: Office) doesnt go through it (i suspect due to a lack of bandwidth and server power) but a number of other things do that are only required for a handful of classes.

My guess would be that you just have a Windows terminal server or Citrix server with the Novell client installed.[/quote]

its not citrix. zenworks manages the stuff loaded on the desktop, and again, asking the guy im under is where i got that it was served up by the novell server.

admittedly, i havent explored it much.

 

[videogames101]

VNC has an option to only poll foreground window.

 

[cmetz]

Fox5, Citrix more or less figured out how to do what you want. It's expensive and has its limitations, but it can swallow and remote-display individual applications, and it works.

ViRGE, I'm disappointed to see a moderator so blatantly trolling.

 

[Nothinman]

A lot of the deficiencies in Linux GUIs such as poor shared 3D performance, little video acceleration, and general wonkiness are a direct result of the need to keep arcane features like forwarding working.

3D acceleration is fine for me, it took a while to appear in X but it's there now. And I don't see X as wonky at all and I think the separation of X, toolkits, apps, etc yields more benefits than problems.

The sensible thing to do would be to move some of the graphics subsystem in to the kernel, but that would break stupid features like forwarding, and the long-beards would never have that.

No, that wouldn't be a good thing. Even MS realized this with Vista when they moved video and sound drivers to userland.

its not citrix. zenworks manages the stuff loaded on the desktop, and again, asking the guy im under is where i got that it was served up by the novell server.

Ah yea, Novell ZenWorks can be used to push software in a similar manner to how you can push MSIs via GPOs in AD.

 

[ViRGE]

Originally posted by: cmetz
Fox5, Citrix more or less figured out how to do what you want. It's expensive and has its limitations, but it can swallow and remote-display individual applications, and it works.

ViRGE, I'm disappointed to see a moderator so blatantly trolling.

I'm not trolling. I just absolutely hate X-Windows, it's a horrible system that should have died a painful death 15 years ago in favor of a real graphical environment.

PS I am not a mod in Networking

 

[Nothinman]

I'm not trolling. I just absolutely hate X-Windows, it's a horrible system that should have died a painful death 15 years ago in favor of a real graphical environment.

But why? I use X every day and have virtually no problems with it. There's quirks just like with any system but I find the limitations in Windows much more annoying when I have to use it.

PS I am not a mod in Networking

Doesn't matter, the fact that you're a mod at all means you're a representative of Anand.