ACM Home Page
Please provide us with feedback. Feedback
THINC: a virtual display architecture for thin-client computing
Full text PdfPdf (297 KB)
Source ACM Symposium on Operating Systems Principles archive
Proceedings of the twentieth ACM symposium on Operating systems principles table of contents
Brighton, United Kingdom
SESSION: Optimization table of contents
Pages: 277 - 290  
Year of Publication: 2005
ISBN:1-59593-079-5
Also published in ...
Authors
Ricardo A. Baratto  Columbia University, New York, NY
Leonard N. Kim  Columbia University, New York, NY
Jason Nieh  Columbia University, New York, NY
Sponsors
ACM: Association for Computing Machinery
SIGOPS: ACM Special Interest Group on Operating Systems
Publisher
ACM  New York, NY, USA
Bibliometrics
Downloads (6 Weeks): 15,   Downloads (12 Months): 198,   Citation Count: 11
Additional Information:

abstract   references   cited by   index terms   collaborative colleagues  

Tools and Actions: Request Permissions Request Permissions    Review this Article  
DOI Bookmark: Use this link to bookmark this Article: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1095810.1095837
What is a DOI?

ABSTRACT

Rapid improvements in network bandwidth, cost, and ubiquity combined with the security hazards and high total cost of ownership of personal computers have created a growing market for thin-client computing. We introduce THINC, a virtual display architecture for high-performance thin-client computing in both LAN and WAN environments. THINC virtualizes the display at the device driver interface to transparently intercept application display commands and translate them into a few simple low-level commands that can be easily supported by widely used client hardware. THINC's translation mechanism efficiently leverages display semantic information through novel optimizations such as offscreen drawing awareness, native video support, and server-side screen scaling. This is integrated with an update delivery architecture that uses shortest command first scheduling and non-blocking operation. THINC leverages existing display system functionality and works seamlessly with unmodified applications, window systems, and operating systems.We have implemented THINC in an X/Linux environment and compared its performance against widely used commercial approaches, including Citrix MetaFrame, Microsoft RDP, GoToMyPC, X, NX, VNC, and Sun Ray. Our experimental results on web and audio/video applications demonstrate that THINC can provide up to 4.8 times faster web browsing performance and two orders of magnitude better audio/video performance. THINC is the only thin client capable of transparently playing full-screen video and audio at full frame rate in both LAN and WAN environments. Our results also show for the first time that thin clients can even provide good performance using remote clients located in other countries around the world.


REFERENCES

Note: OCR errors may be found in this Reference List extracted from the full text article. ACM has opted to expose the complete List rather than only correct and linked references.

 
1
100x100 Project. http://100x100network.org/.
 
2
802.11 Wireless LAN Performance. http://www.atheros.com/pt/atheros_range_whitepaper.pdf.
 
3
4
 
5
Charon Systems. http://www.charon.com.
 
6
 
7
 
8
9
 
10
Citrix Metaframe. http://www.citrix.com.
 
11
B. C. Cumberland, G. Carius, and A. Muir. Microsoft Windows NT Server 4.0, Terminal Server Edition: Technical Reference. Microsoft Press, Redmond, WA, 1999.
 
12
Dan Tynan, InfoWorld. Think thin. http://www.infoworld.com/article/05/07/14/29FEthin_1.html.
 
13
 
14
Fog Creek Copilot. http://www.copilot.com.
 
15
 
16
GoToMyPC. http://www.gotomypc.com/.
 
17
Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act. http://www.hhs.gov/ocr/hipaa/.
18
 
19
i-Bench version 1.5. http://etestinglabs.com/benchmarks/i-bench/i-bench.asp.
 
20
Jim Gettys. Personal communication, July 2004.
 
21
Keith Packard. An LBX Postmortem. http://keithp.com/~keithp/talks/lbxpost/paper.html.
22
23
 
24
LapLink, Bothell, WA. LapLink 2000 User's Guide, 1999.
 
25
J. Nieh, S. J. Yang, and N. Novik. A Comparison of Thin-Client Computing Architectures. Technical Report CUCS-022-00, Department of Computer Science, Columbia University, Nov. 2000.
26
 
27
J. Nielsen. Designing Web Usability. New Riders Publishing, Indianapolis, IN, 2000.
 
28
NoMachine NX. http://www.nomachine.com.
 
29
R. Pike, D. Presotto, S. Dorward, B. Flandrena, K. Thompson, H. Trickey, and P. Winterbottom. Plan 9 from Bell Labs. Computing Systems, 8(3):221--254, Summer 1995.
 
30
Portable Network Graphics (PNG). http://www.libpng.org/pub/png/.
31
 
32
 
33
Runaware.com. http://www.runaware.com.
 
34
Tarantella Web-Enabling Software: The Adaptive Internet Protocol. SCO Technical White Paper, Dec. 1998.
35
36
 
37
PC Anywhere. http://www.pcanywhere.com.
 
38
Thin-Client market to fatten up, IDC says. http://news.com.com/2100-1003-5077884.html.
 
39
 
40
SGI OpenGL Vizserver. http://www.sgi.com/software/vizserver/.
 
41
Virtual Network Computing. http://www.realvnc.com/.
 
42
A. Y. Wong and M. Seltzer. Operating System Support for Multi-User, Remote, Graphical Interaction. In Proceedings of the USENIX Annual Technical Conference, San Diego, CA, June 2000.
 
43
Worldwide Enterprise Thin Client Forecast and Analysis, 2002-2007: The Rise of Thin Machines. http://www.idcresearch.com/getdoc.jhtml?containerId=30016.
 
44
X Web FAQ. http://www.broadwayinfo.com/bwfaq.htm.
 
45

CITED BY  12
 
 
 
 

Collaborative Colleagues:
Ricardo A. Baratto: colleagues
Leonard N. Kim: colleagues
Jason Nieh: colleagues