>I'd still suggest an http-based (maybe with java) solution,
>which would be easily runnable on a web server visible to both
>ends of the file transfer.
Who provides this HTTP server? Is it built into the VNC server or client -
or both? One can't expect everyone to have webspace which they can
dedicate to this kind of application, or the expertise to set it up
correctly. Most ISPs' "free Web space", for example, cannot be accessed
for upload from outside the ISPs' own dialups. I just "upgraded" my
account at my own ISP to allow this for myself.
Consider the scenario where a VNC user sets up a fiendishly complicated
tunnel system to get his VNC client to connect to his server, but then he
wants to do some file transfer. If the HTTP server is built into the
server (and there is usually already one present), then the client can't
see it without yet more tunnels being set up. If it's built into the
client, that's one big overhead on the client. And what if the client
itself is not visible to the Internet, eg. behind a simple NAT gateway?
I frequently have to use the above scenario, and I can tell you it's an
absolute PITA. Fortunately, I rarely need to transfer more than a few Kb
at a time, so I can FTP it via a shell account on a separate machine.
However, that account won't last forever - probably until shortly after I
graduate.
I honestly can't see why people think it's "more intuitive" to use
functionality that isn't integrated with the client and/or server and/or
the protocol itself. Especially when the alternative, for a significant
segment of the user population, involves lots of hassle if not
impossibility.
A final thought - if we make it *truly* easy to use, instead of making the
user jump through hoops, we'll see much less in the way of annoying FAQs
posted on the list. Witness the horrifying state of WinVNC's user
interface, which forces all but the most basic of configuration to be done
by hand-editing the Registry. How many questions do we receive about, for
example, enabling the 'confirmation dialog' which is now built into WinVNC,
but can only be set up using the Registry? How many do we receive about
changing the port VNC listens on? We still get quite a few on the latter,
but the ratio is quite strongly biased towards the former example. IOW,
making it easy and integrated makes *everyone's* life easier, not just the
users'.
--------------------------------------------------------------
from: Jonathan "Chromatix" Morton
mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (not for attachments)
big-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
uni-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The key to knowledge is not to rely on people to teach you it.
Get VNC Server for Macintosh from http://www.chromatix.uklinux.net/vnc/
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version 3.12
GCS$/E/S dpu(!) s:- a20 C+++ UL++ P L+++ E W+ N- o? K? w--- O-- M++$ V? PS
PE- Y+ PGP++ t- 5- X- R !tv b++ DI+++ D G e+ h+ r++ y+(*)
-----END GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, send a message with the line: unsubscribe vnc-list
to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
See also: http://www.uk.research.att.com/vnc/intouch.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------
