I just signed up for WorldZonePro, and telneted to their server and it looks like they dont even have X11 installed.

The whole reason I signed up was because I saw that they had telnet. I usually like to do my programming, and other stuff on the server, so I dont have to do it on my computer then upload it, then fix something, then upload again, etc, etc. If there is no X11, I cant open windows, and that means I cant really do anything so it defeates the purpose. for me atleast.

its like just using does instead of windows

Depending on their os, try typing 'pico filename.here.txt' or 'nano filename.here.txt' or 'vi filename.here.txt' thats how I do all my programming and server up keep from command line....

Its just faster....

I'd rather it pop up a separate window.
that way I could have one window editing the file, another window to test my program, another window for whatever

kind of like using windows instead of dos.
you can multitask in windows because you have windows, but in dos you cant

I'm fairly sure you can open multi connections to the host, just have 2 terminal windows open, and login via the same account, of course the host may only allow one connection at a time, not sure...

I'd be scared of any host who offered X11...it takes up a ton of RAM, CPU, and bandwidth. And it's insecure.

You can multitask with programs like screen, or you can just open multiple ssh windows.

well thats better but not the same.
you dont get the GUI interface.
you might not beable to use your mouse.

Originally posted by qslack
I'd be scared of any host who offered X11...it takes up a ton of RAM, CPU, and bandwidth. And it's insecure.

You can multitask with programs like screen, or you can just open multiple ssh windows.

it does not take a ton of ram, cpu, bandwidth.
of course it does take more.
and it CAN be secure if they make it secure.

opening multiple ssh windows is not the same.
its like the difference between using edit from dos, and using word. or using lynx instead of using netscape.
you CAN multitask that way, but its still not the same.

Welcome to the world of *nix, mice are not needed. Everything you ever wanted to do and maintain can be done from command line, its secure, reliable, no muss and no fuss. *nix handles mutlitasking better than windows, try running ftp, http, irc, news, pop3, imap, and smtp, try running that many things on Windows and keep it up for 3 months without crashing. You can ssh/telnet to your server use pico or vi, edit your files, reboot the server remotely, no need for a mouse....

yes, if you are running a server and you wont be using the computer, you dont need a mouse or even a monitor.
but you are a user of a computer, you do need a mouse.

mouse not required?
try talking to any who uses unix everyday.
X is a must. its like just sticking with dos and not using windows. yes I know even with out X, unix is better at multitasking, but with out the ability to open windows, I dont see how anyone can really use unix. you are missing out.
maybe 10 years ago, you might have an argument, but come live in the present

I use unix everyday. Instead of using any stupid IDEs, I use vim. My IRC client of choice is epic. This is all done via ssh without a mouse. I use screen, so I have 10 different windows, and can switch to them by typing ^A-#. Much easier than moving my mouse.

You really shouldn't expect any host to run X11...I'd be surprised if any did. It IS a security risk, the latency would be terrible, it takes up a ton of CPU and RAM, and it would take up a lot of bandwidth. Even running it over my LAN to a computer one hop away, the latency is terrible. Imagine running it over the Internet.

There might be a few hosts who run it, but they probably just installed RH7.1 and don't know how to disable it :)

Originally posted by qslack
I use unix everyday. Instead of using any stupid IDEs, I use vim. My IRC client of choice is epic. This is all done via ssh without a mouse. I use screen, so I have 10 different windows, and can switch to them by typing ^A-#. Much easier than moving my mouse.

You really shouldn't expect any host to run X11...I'd be surprised if any did. It IS a security risk, the latency would be terrible, it takes up a ton of CPU and RAM, and it would take up a lot of bandwidth. Even running it over my LAN to a computer one hop away, the latency is terrible. Imagine running it over the Internet.

There might be a few hosts who run it, but they probably just installed RH7.1 and don't know how to disable it :)

yes but somethings are far easier with a mouse. like copy and paste. or if you happen to be browsing the web. I use X at work over the network and there is no latecy problem. I do the same at home and I'm only on a 10MB network and I also have no latency problem. My linux is only running on an old K6 300MHz processer with 128MB ram and I have no speed problems. my programs run just as fast as on my other webhosts. I have dual ISDN also, and I open windows from my schools computer. There is a slight delay when the window opens, but after that, there is no problem. I can even run netscape and its the same speed. although my school only has 3.0 installed :(

also, as for security, at work, we use kerberos, so the conection is encrypted. eventhough security isnt really my #1 concern

I really doubt you'll convince anyone it's a good idea to run X on a web server. Well actually they don't even need to be running anything, just install the clients, but still there's little need to do it.

Like others have said you can simply open multiple ssh windows. If you can't cut and paste in your ssh app you need a new one. If you're too lazy to type ctrl-C you can use SecureCRT which can be set to X style cut and paste.

A dual ISDN isn't nearly fast enough to run X. It was never meant to be a WAN protocol. And personally I can't imagine opening an X server on my home machine if it was connected with any kind of always on connection. The security risks are huge.

I can copy and paste with my mouse. I use putty and just need to select text to copy, and right-click to paste.

What are these other webhosts you speak of who offer X11?

Originally posted by qslack
I can copy and paste with my mouse. I use putty and just need to select text to copy, and right-click to paste.

What are these other webhosts you speak of who offer X11?

no, I was saying that my programs written with perl and python run just as fast on my other webhosts. those hosts dont have telnet access.

I was looking for more of a development platform where I could also host my website.
yes dual ISDN is too slow, but it is fast enough. There is a delay for the windows to actually pop up, but after that, using the window is just fine.

You may not need these things for the users if it is just a server to serve a website, but I "assumed" that if they were to offer telnet access, it meant that they would want users to beable to develop their programs and scripts on the server, otherwise I feel that it defeats the purpose.

I have never tried SecureCRT so I didnt know you cut do the X cut and paste. I was just saying that using the mouse to cut and paste is alot easier for me.

Just opening mulitple clients does not allow you to use programs with GUI interfaces, thats all I'm saying.

Originally posted by qslack
I use unix everyday. Instead of using any stupid IDEs, I use vim. My IRC client of choice is epic. This is all done via ssh without a mouse. I use screen, so I have 10 different windows, and can switch to them by typing ^A-#. Much easier than moving my mouse.

You really shouldn't expect any host to run X11...I'd be surprised if any did. It IS a security risk, the latency would be terrible, it takes up a ton of CPU and RAM, and it would take up a lot of bandwidth. Even running it over my LAN to a computer one hop away, the latency is terrible. Imagine running it over the Internet.

There might be a few hosts who run it, but they probably just installed RH7.1 and don't know how to disable it :)

The latency does get pretty bad, but it can be ok for simple apps (xterms, text editors, etc.). I occasionally fire up an X server on my laptop at home and connect to machines at work through a VPN connection that is going from Boston to New Jersey and back (I work for a large corporation and the nearest VPN gateway to Boston is in NJ).

As for running X on a web server, I have to agree with comments about its use of resources and potential security problems.

Originally posted by joe52


The latency does get pretty bad, but it can be ok for simple apps (xterms, text editors, etc.). I occasionally fire up an X server on my laptop at home and connect to machines at work through a VPN connection that is going from Boston to New Jersey and back (I work for a large corporation and the nearest VPN gateway to Boston is in NJ).

As for running X on a web server, I have to agree with comments about its use of resources and potential security problems.

I guess I'm just lucky, I have never ran into any large latency problems. just when opening windows, but actually using them, no problem. dual ISDN was just fast enough for me, using dialup was way too slow.
I'm running X on my K6-300 and the speed is fine. I would assume running it on a server would be alot better for multiple users. as for sercurity problems, yes there is a potential, like with using anything, but taking the right measures can reduce the security risk.

as I said before, if a host offers telnet, I would assume that they would be equipped to handle it. just giving the console with no X, is pretty useless for me. I'd rather use windows and keep uploading.