I used to work in a place where we had Windows Server 2008 R2 VMs, and when I would remote to them, the desktop resolution would always resize itself to the size of the window I was connecting with, so there would never be any scrollbars.
Now I'm working at a place where we have Windows Server 2008 R2 on a VM that I'm remoting to, and the server's resolution seems fixed. And it's slightly larger than my external monitor, so I always get scrollbars, and have to scroll around to get to the Start menu etc. I'm finding this annoying.
How do you configure Remote Desktop on the server so that it resizes to the size of the connecting window?
There is even better option. Use Remote Desktop Connection Manager 2.7 from Microsoft, but depending on your needs I recommend older version Remote Desktop Manager 2.2 if you need to scale up to full screen.
Not just that you can create groups and list all remote machines that you connect to, but you can also specify screen resolution for each one!
Create new server and in Remote Desktop Tab choose screen resolution.
The main benefit is that when you select Full Screen from Session menu, your host screen is filled up, just like VNC!
I had different problem, my screen is 1920x1080 and when connecting to remote, everything was too small, fonts, etc. So, I set RDP resolution to custom 1536x864 and everything is scaled up nicely, fonts are bigger, etc.
If you are establishing a connection from a Microsoft Windows system, have you tried mstsc with width and height parameters in pixels from the command line on your remote system to establish an RDP connection? E.g.:
mstsc /w:1024 /h:768 /v:server1.example.com
Or you could try the span parameter, which "matches the remote desktop width and height with the local virtual desktop, spanning across multiple monitors, if necessary. To span across monitors, the monitors must be arranged to form a rectangle." E.g.:
mstsc /span /v:server1.example.com
Related
I automate processes on a remote computer. When I start a process from the control room, that works totally fine. But as soon as I minimize or close the remote computer (I don't shut it down, I just close the window), the remote computer crashes. The log contains entries like that elements cannot be found. The reason is, that the remote computer does not even open the applications.
So, what's the reason for that? The computers state is on desktop, so there is no screensaver or logon screen.
Expected result: The robot should work finely even when the remote desktop session is not on screen, like in production environment.
You haven't specified, but the below answer extrapolates your statements regarding how you've "[minimized] or [closed]" your "remote computer" to assume you're leveraging Microsoft's Remote Desktop Connection utility/protocol.
Blue Prism specifically discourages the use of Remote Desktop to manipulate remote Runtime Resources within a Blue Prism-based environment, as the use of the protocol itself causes the methodologies Blue Prism uses to locate elements in the Windows desktop environment to stop working entirely. This is explicitly spelled out in Blue Prism's official documentation on Remote Access Tools:
The following tools have been deemed to be specifically unsuitable for
providing remote access to Blue Prism environments:
Remote Desktop Connection (RDP)
The way that this Windows tool (and other tools that
use the RDP protocol) handle session management is not compatible with
Blue Prism:
The underlying operating system is aware as a connection is established which can, subject to the automation techniques being
applied, result in the executing automation being interupted.
It requires the remote access credentials to be aligned with the credentials used to authenticate the target system against the network
which presents a potential security risk.
As a user authenticates any previously connected users are locked out.
Each connection creates a separate desktop session.
The connection is not maintained throughout a system reboot.
So I am connecting to my work computer from home and the Remote Desktop Connection app is annoyingly slow.
I pinged my work pc from my computer and it returned at a reasonable time of 50ms~ with 0 loss. I then attempted to ping my home IP from the RDP session and it timed out every time. Not sure if this might help anyone come to a conclusion but hopefully it does. Note I am also using it in conjunction with Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client if that helps at all. Work is Windows 7 and Home is Windows 8
I attempted switching off my home pc's firewall but that did nothing.
Any assistance would be great, surely a setting in the RDP file might make it run a little smoother.
I'll edit this post with further attempts at fixes below
Did three things and now RDP is running screaming fast:
Change RDP settings:
Run the RDP session and connect to the remote machine
Find mstcsc.exe in the Task Manager and and set priority to Realtime
I installed Ubuntu server XRDP. Went through Windows and terribly slowed down. I solved this problem. In the /etc/xrdp/xrdp.ini file, change crypt_level=high to crypt_level=None
Our remote chain is Citrix then RDP, target machine is Win 10.
I solved this issue by changing the mouse pointer scheme to None and disabling the pointer shadow.
In Windows 10. Go to Display Settings >> Scale and Layout >> Set the custom scale to 120 [you may need to experiment, try 110 - 150]
After that log in to your Remote Desktop, it should adjust the resolution and scaling factors.
It gave me a faster experience. If you need more then follow the answer of Mr. B
I want to see remotely some running GUI application without kill the current process, I have tried vnc and xrdp, xrdp opens a new blank session, so it is not for me, vnc is good, but not exactly what I need, it uses the screen and devices presents, someone could mess with me moving the mouse or typing on the keyboard.
Therefore I figured out the only way I could do what I need is managing to shift a running X window from one display to another, thus even on a SSH -X (X11 forwarding) I would be able to see it.
I am on this quest for a long time and I didn't found out a conclusive solution, that is the reason I am appealing to you. Could you help me to solve this trouble?
Thanks,
I've never used it myself, but Xpra appears to be the commonly suggested solution; you might also consider xmove. Both of these work by proxying the X client's connection to its server, and keeping track of enough state so that you can switch the proxy's server-side connection among servers and get a sensible result. Without such a proxy, as in "stock" X, it is not possible to disconnect a client from one server and connect it to another, except in the case of a client which is designed specifically to support such behavior.
If you look at the Wikipedia page on the subject there are several apps mentioned.
Xmove
excerpt
xmove is a computer program that allows the movement of X Window
System applications between different displays and the persistence of
X applications across X server restarts.[4] It solves a problem in the
design of X, where an X client (an X application) is tied to the X
server (X display) it was started on for its lifetime. Also, if the X
server is shut down, the client application is forced to stop running.
xmove lets the client disconnect from its current X server, and
connect to a new one, at any time. The transition is completely
transparent to the client. xmove works by acting as a proxy between
the client and server. It is a "pseudoserver" which stores enough
server state so that clients can connect to a new server without being
disrupted.
Xpra
excerpt
xpra or X Persistent Remote Applications is a tool which allows you to
run X clients usually on a remote host and then direct their display
to your local machine without losing any state.1
It differs from standard X forwarding in that it allows disconnection
and reconnection without disrupting the forwarded application. It
differs from VNC and similar remote display technologies in that xpra
is rootless: i.e., applications forwarded by xpra appear on your
desktop as normal windows managed by your window manager, rather than
being all "trapped in a box together". Xpra also uses a custom
protocol that is self-tuning and relatively latency-insensitive, and
thus is usable over worse links than standard X.
Guievict
excerpt
guievict is a computer program which enables the GUI of any
application for XFree86 implementation of X Window to be transparently
migrated to or replicated on another display. Unlike some program
providing similar functionalities, it requires neither prearranging
steps such as re-linking the application program binary nor
re-directing the application process's window system communication
through a proxy like xmove does.
Guievict is based on a small X server extension that enables an
application to retrieve its window state from the X server and a
library of GUI migration functionality that is injected in the
application process at run time. Code injection or runtime
code-patching can be done via the DynInst API. However, guievict
contains its own implementation to avoid requiring users to install
DynInst.
Of the 3 of these, Guievict sounds like what you're looking for, mainly that it can checkpoint the state of X application AppX and migrate it to another X server where it can be restored.
(This answer comes from slm at unix.stackexchange)
I'm considering installing Windows Server 2008 R2 at home on an old(ish) PC and relegating the machine to the basement. One thing I'm wondering though:
Once I've installed Windows on the machine and set everything up, does the machine still need a video card installed, or can I pull it and just remote to the machine as and when I need to access it? It seems a bit pointless needing a video card in there eating power if it's not going to be connected to a monitor.
James
If you want to ever access the console (eg. solving a networking problem that prevents remote access) then you'll need a video card.
Unless you install extra components Windows Server will just run as SVGA (albeit allowing 1600x1200 and up resolution) not making use of any acceleration or other power hungry functions of the graphics card. If not using the console it should also go into power saving mode. Therefore the power drain will be much lower than the graphics card's maximum rating.
Can someone explain what is the difference between X server and Remote Terminal servers in simple terms?
For example, Hummingbird Exceed is an X server and Citrix is a Remote Terminal Server. How do these servers work?
A terminal server runs at the "other" machine while you use a remote desktop client to view the other machine's screen.
A X server (of the X11 Window System) runs on your machine while another machine (or several thereof) send their output to your computer.
The most important difference to the end user is probably "culture": With the X Window system you typically work with windows that run on several hosts. (You often sit in front of a quite stripped down workstation, get one application from one computer, another one from another computer.) When working with X things feel very heterogeneous - a special application only runs on a HP workstation while your company is stuffed with suns or linux boxes? No problem, just buy one HP, everone can use that application over the network like as it was local.)
Remote terminal services feel more like another computer sends its complete screen to you, more like you have a 100-Mile-Long monitor and usb cable (with a little lag built in). You typically use a remote desktop client that sends a complete desktop to you.
However in recent times both techniques get close to another - windows remote desktop (which is based on citrix) can send only application windows to your desktop, while a lot of programs based on X11 are theoretically network transparent but practically need to run on the local machine. (Sorry, no 3D shooter over the network - an extreme example).
Which one is better? I don't dare to say. White X11 is a lot more flexible (it was designed with network transparency in mind - it makes absolutely no difference if an application runs local or remote - it is in many aspects more complicated. As long as there was no remote desktop sharing there was a clear advantage, but slowly the gap is closing, for example by terminal services now allowing you to do many things that were available with X11 only in earlier times.)
By the way, the main reason many X11 application still feel a little "snappier" over the network than windows counterparts is the thing that many application programmers on windows still think they always run local and dump a lot of bitmap graphics on the screen - like custom toolbars in ZIP tools. X11 applications did not do this for a long time and chose "ugly but fast" because X11 forces you to think about the network. But as X11 applications get more pretty and Windows programmers more aware about terminal services the difference will dwindle.
Oh and an important point: X11 is deeply ingrained in the Unix way of things, Citrix is mainly used on Windows (in the form of Microsoft's Windows Terminal Services - which originated in Citrix code). So lock a terminal services admin and a X11 operator into a cage and step back watching bloodshed when they figure out who they are locked in with ...
An X server most likely refers to the X11 windowing system, which is the GUI that most unix flavors (including linux) use. It's a client/server setup, and has been around for a very long time
A remote Terminal Server in the case of Citrix is a remote windows instance that can be connected to with a special Citrix client. The Citrix environments I'm familiar with are all MS Windows solutions, ie they work similar to X, but are for Windows Servers only
They both sort of operate in similar fashions, which is serving a remote client a windowing solution. IE, they both let a server run the actual application while the display of that application is sent back over the network to a client PC.
A 'Terminal Server', as it's called, basically allow you to connect to a Windows session remotely. They employ a bit of magic to make the experience snappy over connections with latency. The Windows GUI system isn't network transparent like X, so it took a while longer to get this feature. Windows Server 2008 and Citrix products have the ability to let you use a single application, unlike the traditional Terminal Server.
X is the GUI protocol for Unix/Linux. The X server accepts connections and displays their windows. The clients are actually the programs themselves. These clients can be local or remote, it doesn't matter to X. X just displays them as requested, on the local screen or over a TCP connection. This is lower level stuff than terminal servers, and allows graphical programs to run on one machine and display on another. X11 doesn't compress or encrypt the traffic like RDP does (although SSH can help you out there).
The linux equivalent of RDP is NX. They provide free software to run NX servers/clients. I've used it and it works pretty well.