Slashdot: News for Nerds


Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Apple Remote Desktop 1.2 Released

timothy posted more than 11 years ago | from the remote-control dept.

OS X 38

sirisaac82 writes "Apple released version 1.2 of its Remote Desktop software. According to the website, new features include Remote Software Installation and Remote Network Startup Disk. Too bad it wasn't released yesterday, or you could have had a few more pranks to pull on those annoying co-workers."

cancel ×


Dear Apple (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5648305)

Dear Apple,

I am a homosexual. I bought an Apple computer because of its well earned reputation for being "the" gay computer. Since I have become an Apple owner, I have been exposed to a whole new world of gay friends. It is really a pleasure to meet and compute with other homos such as myself. I plan on using my new Apple computer as a way to entice and recruit young schoolboys into the homosexual lifestyle; it would be so helpful if you could produce more software which would appeal to young boys. Thanks in advance.

with much gayness,

Father Randy "Pudge" O'Day, S.J.

Re:Dear Apple (-1, Troll)

Tuxinatorium (463682) | more than 11 years ago | (#5648665)

I'll have you know that Apple also has a very large contingent of lesbian customers!

Dear Father O'Day (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5648327)

Dear Father O'Day:

Thanks for your letter. Being Catholic myself, I know exactly what you're talking about! It has always been our plan here at Apple Computer Inc to revolutionize personal computing with our high-quality and highly gay products.

I'm happy to answer your letter by letting you know that YES we will be releasing an entire hLife ("homo-life") software line. You'll be able to recognize it in stores by the small stylized logo depicting a large cock entering a tight anus with an Apple logo on it. ("Suddenly it all comes together" indeed!).

Anyway, I hope you and other members of our community will join us on our mission, and purchase the exciting new hLife boxed set. Only the boxed set comes with translucent cock rings!


Harry Rodman
Homosexual Liaison Services
Apple Computer, Inc.

Nice. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5648412)

So...the only people who responded to this article are two trolls? What the hell....

Wow ! (3, Informative)

Utopia (149375) | more than 11 years ago | (#5648518)

The multiple observe classroom feature seems pretty neat!
Windows can do this too (See Shadowing Remote Desktop [] )
but it isn't as elegent as Apple's solution.

Re:Wow ! (1)

klui (457783) | more than 11 years ago | (#5648892)

Looks like you need to use Windows Server Enterprise 2003 or DataCenter edition based server for use as a proxy to get the equivalent functionality within Windows. Just throw more money in hardware and MS licenses.

I am impressed with Windows Remote Desktop's speed. It beats TightVNC by a "mile" in terms of responsivness. I use it to connect to my work Windows XP desktop via VPN and response is very good. I also have access to network resources at corporate LAN speeds without a lot of the problems with, say, using Outlook via DSL. But using Microsoft VSS is another issue altogether--it's painfully slow even at work even though it is via a WAN.

Does anyone know how the response is for Apple Remote Desktop?

Re:Wow ! (1)

Hes Nikke (237581) | more than 11 years ago | (#5651384)

Does anyone know how the response is for Apple Remote Desktop?

i run 1.1 at 11 Mbps on my Airport connection, it feels just like VNC, slow and choppy :\

Re:Wow ! (1)

cscx (541332) | more than 11 years ago | (#5676891)

I am impressed with Windows Remote Desktop's speed.

The thing that amazed me was logging into my machine using Remote Desktop from a computer lab a mile away, and having it automatically map *all* the network printers in that computer lab, drivers loaded and all. I think it tunnels it through the local machine or something, but all I had to do was hit File-> Print on the remote application and it listed all the \\remote\nnn printers, and sure enough it spit out at the computer lab!

I was sold.

Re:Wow ! (1)

bbtom (581232) | more than 11 years ago | (#5651211)

Yeah... great. Invasion of privacy! Whoo!

And who said kids aren't growing up in a world of freedom and privacy. Fuck that.

Re:Wow ! (1)

diverman (55324) | more than 11 years ago | (#5661452)

Invasion of privacy in a school environment? Okay! I'm an advocate of right to privacy too, but give me a break. Don't ruin the cause by making claims that something like THIS is an invasion.

In a school, students don't have much privacy to begin with. And when you're talking about what they are doing on school provided computers, during classtime (ie. when they are supposed to be working), the teacher has every right to look. Teachers used to walk around the classroom and peek over your shoulder. Was that an invasion to privacy? If you got caught writing a note, the teacher could read it aloud if they wanted.

Kids are being given more "rights to privacy" than we ever had before, despite technology allowing for monitoring.

Video cameras in the school. That I'm still on the fence about. But monitoring computer use. The school has EVERY right. If they can be held responsible for a student doing something bad with the computer (which they would be), they can do what is necessary to prevent it, and see that school funds are used appropriately.



Re:Wow ! (1)

bbtom (581232) | more than 11 years ago | (#5662079)

Perhaps if they managed to teach kids something, then I might tolerate it, but seeing as most kids learn jack-shit from school.

We're in a society based around freedom, why not give people the right to it, rather than running schools like a fascist shithole which our 'boys' go and "regime change" every few years.

School is there to teach, not to read my email. (I'm mainly pissed off because they've filtered outgoing SSH from my college... because that's what HACKERS use, and HACKERS are BAD PEOPLE and spread VIRUSES!! Whoo!)

Re:Wow ! (2, Insightful)

Mononoke (88668) | more than 11 years ago | (#5664855)

Perhaps if they managed to teach kids something, then I might tolerate it, but seeing as most kids learn jack-shit from school.
You can thank parents for that problem. Especially parents who fail to teach their children to respect elders.

Teaching (and learning) begins at home. If it doesn't, it never occurs in school.

Re:Wow ! (1)

diverman (55324) | more than 11 years ago | (#5679908)

This is mostly about HS and below. Not college. And if a university wants to limit services made available through the computers they provide well, tough shit. As with most universities, your bandwidth is probably provided to you free! It's not part of your tuition.

I was at school before they had networks available in the dorms and all. Actually, I was part of the beta group to make them available at UCSD. Don't whine because you don't get everything exactly the way you want it.

To think that there is such a thing as absolute freedom is ignorance. That would be anarchy, and we all know that anarchy is a perfectly good environment for freedom and growth. Perhaps if you paid attention more, and weren't reading email during class you MIGHT learn something. I did.

I can't believe I'm saying this, but what the hell is wrong with the youth these days??? heh. Yeah, I know that I probably thought I deserved everything I wanted when I was younger... but be a little realistic. Damn kids think they know everything, and that the world can be a perfect place if only people did what they said and gave them what they wanted. Sounds more like a temper tantrum than anything else. Grow up!


Re:Wow ! (1)

bbtom (581232) | more than 11 years ago | (#5680154)

Yeah, I know. Most of your suggestions are based on common sense, wheras mine are based on being very angry. Which is definitely not the best way to formulate and disseminate useful opinions.

Anyway, I'd quite like to see schools run democratically - each student gets a vote. That would rule enormously.

Re:Wow ! (1)

bbtom (581232) | more than 11 years ago | (#5667822)

I didn't have time for a point by point response...

"students don't have much privacy to begin with"

Yep. That's bad. Really bad actually. They should have as much as other citizens. Because, in effect, they are citizens.

"school provided computers, during classtime"

Who pays for those computers? - taxpayers. Therefore they ought to have a say in whether Junnior's privacy is being invaded.

"used to walk around the classroom and peek over your shoulder. Was that an invasion to privacy?"

Yes. Precedent does not justify wrongdoing.

"If you got caught writing a note, the teacher could read it aloud if they wanted."

Invasion of privacy! Copyright infringement. You wrote the note - and therefore it belongs to you, and if someone reads it aloud who has not been given permission, they are infringing your copyright: public performance is implied to be forbidden.

"Kids are given more "rights to privacy" than we ever had before, despite technology allowing fo r monitoring."

As they should be. Privacy is the most amazingly wicked thing ever. Give it to them.

"Video cameras in the school."

That sucks.

"But monitoring computer use. The school has EVERY right."

No they don't. Nobdody has given them the right to spy on what you are doing. They have siezed the right. And that is an invasion of privacy. Simple. As. That.

Plus it forms persuasive precedent. The government or colleges or whatever can say: "Schools are doing it, why can't we?"

Re:Wow ! (1)

diverman (55324) | more than 11 years ago | (#5680033)

Do you have kids? I'm serious.

First of all, kids are not full citizens. They do not have the right to vote, drink, or even marry (in most cases). Most children are not capable of being responsible citizens. They are impulsive, selfish, cruel, violent, and completely undisciplined. They're cute until they're about 2 years old. Then they become evil monsters. Then they're cute again after a couple years... then they become monsters once more. And they don't stop being monsters until they become adults, hopefully.

It is the responsibility of the school to teach kids. That means they have the right to do what is necessary to teach the kids within the allowance of parental consent. Most parents don't actually protest these "invasions of privacy", because they know their own kids. And they know that kids, in general, will try and get away with whatever they can and avoid learning or working.

As for your rediculous comments regarding copyright... and not to beat a dead horse... but kids don't have the right to it. They cannot file for copyrights. Only an adult can. Their parents might be able to lay claim to it, but I'm guessing a parent will more likely punish the kid for misbehaving.

Universities are a different story, since college students (for the most part) are adults, and full-fledged citizens. However, monitoring of network bandwidth is not a violation of privacy, providing it is clearly communicated. Just because you pay tuition doesn't give you unlimtted rights to do what you want with school facilities. The precedent set here is along the lines of corporate monitoring and 'spying'. If you want privacy, go pay for a network connection yourself where the terms of agreement specify privacy guaranteed. Schools do not claim to provide this. And no one has a right to expect them to. If this is something the majority of citizens (real ones, not those junior soon-to-be ones), then it should be pushed through legislation.

To not think about all of the ramifications of such a thing is also a great tragedy. I shutter to think what would happen to an already pathetic public school system (not counting college/university). This is society. And society has rules to limit and restrict "freedoms" so that we don't collapse upon ourselves. If you want to remove them, fine... but don't just think that blindly making changes for more "freedom" is always a good thing. It could be... but in the case of students (children) getting the right to do what they want... let's just destroy public education even more then.

Just my thoughts...


Remote Installation (5, Informative)

rsmith-mac (639075) | more than 11 years ago | (#5648690)

I think a lot of people will underestimate the importance of Remote Installation, but this feature is critical to using OS X in large environments. At the moment, you can use products such as Filewave to keep software up to date, but this all goes out the window when it comes to system software - MacOS updates, Quicktime, and even security updates. Apple's installer packages run necessary pre and post installation scripts, and up to now, there hasn't been a remote solution for MacOS X to do anything similar, meaning you couldn't remotely do these updates except by using SSH to run CLI programs(which in turn still limits you, as you're still virtually visiting every machine).

With 1.2, it's now possible to remotely run installer packages en-mass, allowing you to push out software updates, and this is huge. While it's not necessarily the best solution for software updates, 1.2 will none the less allow admins to maintain more X machines than before, enabling large-scale deployments. This is crucial for Apple, as one of the things holding X back has been the lack of remote updates, which means they'll finally be able to break X in to the largest organizations.

This may be a .1 update, but the ramifications of it are huge.

Re:Remote Installation (1)

druzicka (314802) | more than 11 years ago | (#5650146)

you couldn't remotely do these updates except by using SSH to run CLI programs(which in turn still limits you, as you're still virtually visiting every machine).

I've heard that MacOS X is built on a Unix-like operating system which will allow you to use something called "scripting" to handle repetitive tasks. Evidently, Unix admins have been using this technique to manage workstations since before Microsoft SMS was even available.

Re:Remote Installation (3, Insightful)

rsmith-mac (639075) | more than 11 years ago | (#5650616)

Even with scripting, you're more limited than with this. I took a crack at using ARD 1.1 to push out installer packages as modified startup items, but it has a couple of problems, not the least of which is that the user has to reboot before it's executed, and then there's no way to stop the bootup process when it does get executed. I also designed(but never coded out) a process of using cron to execute the contents of a directory pushed out by ARD, but that still shared some of the same problems.

The fact of the matter is that for $499, I can highlight some 200 machines, click a button, select a package, and then let ARD take care of the rest. X may be a Unix, but it doesn't nessisarily need to work like one. I don't want to waste my time scripting, even if I do only need to do it once, I have an Xserve RAID I'd much rather be setting up, and from a market standpoint, a lot of people feel the same way. If Apple wants to break in to the biggest of the big leagues, they need something like this, not just letting an admin try their hand at scripting, and hope that's sucessful and converts in to a sale.

Re:Remote Installation (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5658024)

I've heard that MacOS X is built on a Unix-like operating system

You've heard incorrectly. MacOS X is built on a NeXTStep- and MacOS-like OS that has a Unix interface ducttaped onto the side.

Consequentally, bash is pretty much useless when dealing with Mac applications and Mac data. How do you install MS Office or Netscape from the CLI? Instead you need Mac-specific tools like AppleScript, NetInfo, etc.

Re:Remote Installation (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5651476)

I'm responsible for the administration of a (small) bunch of mac under OS X (10.2).

I think ARA is only relevant when you administer a very small set of computers. When the number of computer is big, CLI (Command Line Interface) is prefered because it is some much simpler to execute remotely (from a shell) and to automate (write a shell script, add it your crontab).

And, at the moment, you don't have to pay anything to do this. Simply use "DiskCopy" (or "hdiutil" for its CLI equivalent) to create an image of the disk you want to replicate, and "asr" (Apple Software Restore) to replicate this image on your clients. Both are distributed for free in your OS X install. ASR as the advantage of being incredibly fast: it works on compressed images (less data to transfer) and at block level (no files to be created !).

man hdiutil
man asr


Re:Remote Installation (2, Informative)

SlamMan (221834) | more than 11 years ago | (#5659854)

Asr has some limitations for tthis sort of thing. Most notably, it doesn't install, it only copies. Asr is the best thing under the sun when you want to toss an image on a new drive (usuualy about an hour faster than ccc), but no so good when you want to update quicktime on all the machines.

RealVNC (2, Interesting)

White Roses (211207) | more than 11 years ago | (#5648717)

I'd really like a RealVNC solution (or compatible) for Mac OS X. I'm using VNCThing to view RealVNC servers from my iMac, but I haven't found much satisfaction in serving VNC off my iMac yet.


Re:RealVNC (4, Informative)

Hanji (626246) | more than 11 years ago | (#5648832)

OSXvnc [] .
Very nice, and easy to use. It's even got (more-or-less) builtin support for launching it from a shell.

Re:RealVNC (1)

klui (457783) | more than 11 years ago | (#5649008)

Redstone says that OSXvnc 1.11 supports zRLE encoding which the realvnc folks says is comparable to tight encoding. So does this mean tightvnc is obsolete?

Re:RealVNC (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5649227)

nice sig: If I put a perl virus here, I wonder how many people would run it, just to see what it did...

I had a similar thought once, and posted this [] . From the thread that followed, I think a good number of people did infact run it without de-obfuscating it :)

Re:RealVNC (1)

anarkhos (209172) | more than 11 years ago | (#5671610)

It's slow as hell and saturates a 10Mbit connection!

Re:RealVNC (1)

Michael.Forman (169981) | more than 11 years ago | (#5648849)

The VNC server OSXvnc [] works quite well for me.

If you're interested in real fun, start a server and on the same machine connect to that server using VNCThing.


Re:RealVNC (3, Informative)

Smurf (7981) | more than 11 years ago | (#5649026)

I suppose that you want something like OSXvnc [] , which allows you to share your main (and only) quartz display.

But you may also want to check out Xvnc for MacOS X [] , which allows you to share secondary X Window sessions (:1 through :99, in theory). This is one of the few huge advantages of X over Quartz/Aqua: you can create several simultaneous sessions that are kept alive independently, and that may be created by different users. It is a really useful feature but unfortunately you can only launch X applications in them, not common Cocoa/Carbon/Classic ones, and you need an X-Win window manager such as WindowMaker or AfterStep or even a full desktop environment as KDE or Gnome.

Best thing.... (3, Insightful)

WasterDave (20047) | more than 11 years ago | (#5648992)

The best thing about this is you can have an unlimited licence for five hundred bucks. It's a bit touch and go as a way to help my mother in law sort stuff out remotely, but for installations much over about a dozen machines it must be a complete no-brainer.


No update for OS 9.x clients (1)

teridon (139550) | more than 11 years ago | (#5652312)

This update only applies to Mac OS X. There is no information on whether an OS 9.x client update will be released.

Re:No update for OS 9.x clients (2, Informative)

davebo (11873) | more than 11 years ago | (#5654302)

Actually, it says at the bottom of the page (ya know, this one [] ) that this update "allows administration of desktop and notebook computers running Mac OS 8.1 through Mac OS 9.2, or Mac OS X v10.1 or later."

So it looks like there's something there for the older OS.

CORRECTION: here is the update for OS 9.x clients (4, Informative)

teridon (139550) | more than 11 years ago | (#5654570)

It was just not linked from the main page -- one had to search the knowledge base to find it.

Read about it/download it here [] .

ARD Speed (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5652817)

I use Timbuktu with my macs, and MS Remote Desktop Connection with a Win2k machine. RDC over the internet is significantly faster than Timbuktu over the local network. Does anyone know how Apple Remote Desktop compares in speed to these other options? Thanx in advance.

Remote Desktop = Incredibe Enterprise Savings (2)

MachineShedFred (621896) | more than 11 years ago | (#5656949)

I work in the IS department of an enterprise environment where Macs are used to make print advertisements (big shock there.)

Moving forward to Mac OS X, one of the big question marks we had was how to push out OS updates. Under the existing Mac OS 9 infrastructure, we would have to either try to FileWave it out if it was just some extensions, or write some gawd-awful perl script with inline applescript to do some of this stuff.

With this remote install feature, now we can use the FREE package builder that comes on the development CD, and also is included in the NetInstall tools of Mac OS X Server to make a .pkg file of anything we want to put out there (default preferences, custom scripts, aliases to pain-in-the-ass SMB shares, etc.) or use pre-existing .pkg files and spew them across the network to unsuspecting users.

I can't wait to get out from behind this firewall to get it through Software Update. If this thing is scriptable too, I think I've found my long-awaited answer to the PC guys' Tivoli deployment scheme. FOR $500, I might add.

Thank you Apple!

Apple is Dying .... (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5658847)

I will feel so much better when those expensive Macs are gone from work.

They really need to switch over to x86 chips before they join the ranks of *BSD.

Oh, and supply three button mice for fuck's sake.

Interesting issue upgrading (2, Interesting)

peaceful_bill (661382) | more than 11 years ago | (#5668530)

Hi all

I have encountered a very interesting problem while upgrading from 1.1 to 1.2 ARD. On the main status window, I have client computers that flash in for a few seconds and then dissapear! I have successfully used ARD since September in a lab with 28 flat panel imacs, static IP addresses, and no DHCP.

Other details: All the machines (including the one's that are errantly popping up my list are on the asme subnet ( The machines I _want_ to manage are 10.2.4, the ones that are popping on my list are 8.6 and 9. The 8.6 on'es are running under an At Ease environment.

I have spoken with Apple Tech support, erased my ARD installation using a shell script that Apple provided; I've also erased my's

When I spoke with Apple, they mentioned that they were aware of a few other people having this problem.

Any suggestions? Bill

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account