[MPlayer-users] OT Re: Using mplayer with NX

[John A. Sullivan III]

On Mon, 2008-06-09 at 13:18 -0700, RC wrote:
> On Mon, 09 Jun 2008 13:52:04 -0400
> "John A. Sullivan III" <jsullivan at opensourcedevel.com> wrote:
> 
> > Thanks for the input.  The difficulty is not mplayer; we are simply
> > using it for testing the concept.  
> 
> Well, it's nice to know your problem has nothing at all to do with the
> mailing list on which you've asked about it...
> 
> > The video-conferencing application lives on the virtual desktop in the
> > data center.  The bottom line challenge is how we get video input from
> > the physical device (thin client, laptop, netbook, who knows - maybe
> > even a cell phone) to the application running on the virtual desktop.
> > The video output is then sent to other video conferencing applications
> > (many of which will be running on the same virtual desktop host) as
> > well as the originating NX client.
> 
> Same problems, same solution.  Sending uncompressed (or poorly
> compressed) video over the network to the server, only to have it
> compressed and decompressed there, then sending the video output
> uncompressed over the network to the thin clients, is an absolutely
> brutal waste of network resources...  Not to mention CPU resources, as
> NX is at least going to do significant (yet futile) processing in an
> attempt to compress the video.  You're basically trying to do
> uncompressed videoconferencing between the thin-client and server, then
> having the server doing actual, (compressed) video conferencing with
> other clients, many of whom may presumably be doing exactly the same
> two-step process.
> 
> Having the videoconferencing application running locally, compressing
> the video feed from the webcam before sending it over the network to
> the conferencing server, and decompressing the video from other
> clients as sent from the conferencing server, would save untold
> amounts of network traffic and drastic CPU processing time.
> 
> > Perhaps, my instincts are wrong but I've spent much of my career doing
> > mid term IT strategy and I see this as a serious issue in the next
> > three years as video becomes an ever more important mode of
> > information exchange - John
> 
> I have no doubt video will become more important in the years to come. 
> The solution, however, seems positively trivial...  It just doesn't
> happen to fit cleanly into your strict thin-client/server mentality.
>   
<snip>
Thank you once again for your response.  However, I am quite well aware
of the issues from flagging a thread as off-topic when it drifts away
from the main subject to the poor network design of this possible
solution (my background is network engineering and not video - as is
probably obvious :-)  ).

I also realize a solution is only trivial when it meets the client's
needs.  In some cases, including a specific one which has been proposed
to me, it is not possible to run the video application on the physical
device; it must reside on the virtual device.  So far, the world has
told this client they cannot do what they want to do and they will need
to bend their business to the limitations of existing technology.

I decided to ask a very knowledgeable and helpful mailing list if there
was a way to say yes and have greatly appreciated the help and advice I
have received.  The answer may still very likely come back, "no," but at
least we will have thought it through and tried.  If I'm surprised by an
unexpected and creative, "yes," so much the better.  Take care - John
-- 
John A. Sullivan III
Open Source Development Corporation
+1 207-985-7880
jsullivan at opensourcedevel.com

http://www.spiritualoutreach.com
Making Christianity intelligible to secular society