Also, if you've never run a VPN, it can be absolutely fascinating. The amount of problems they can generate is hilarious.
Also, if you've never run a VPN, it can be absolutely fascinating. The amount of problems they can generate is hilarious.No kidding. What I was wondering, don't you have people working over there that solve this sort of problem for a living? It's not exactly rocket science, but it's has enough snags that any random dude making guesses about what is a good idea (case in point: our local friendly problem owner ) can spend quite some time before getting it right. Or the other alternative, give it three goes, fsck 'm all up, and then revert to old school local files because "that is what I know".
An alternative way could be setting up a terminal server which people use with Microsoft remote desktop. In that case everybody works on the same computer on which the files are shared.
vpn seems the solution. Dedicated vpn boxes.. Thats gonna cost money. Money we dont have .. Running in startup mode you know .. Pre investor ...
...
Looks like vpn routers are not that expensive... Hmm homework to do ...
An alternative way could be setting up a terminal server which people use with Microsoft remote desktop. In that case everybody works on the same computer on which the files are shared.lol no. So SMB latency and shittiness isn't enough, you want the whole experience to be laggy and prone to completely dropping out as opposed to having open/save fail in hilarious ways?
I thought of sshfs but I'm not sure there is a WIndows client for that and even then is would take setting up users on the Linux/Unix side.
Why don't you get a few synology's, put one on each site, ans set to the constantly synchronize?
thanks for all the input. wow that stuff really is a can of worms. i thought media 2014 stuff like that would be easier. simply go to some cloud storage provider tell em i want 500 gig , here are the users, here are the privileges and mount it as a drive letter. that simply doesn;t seem to be there. maybe a hole in the market.
thanks for all the input. wow that stuff really is a can of worms. i thought media 2014 stuff like that would be easier. simply go to some cloud storage provider tell em i want 500 gig , here are the users, here are the privileges and mount it as a drive letter. that simply doesn;t seem to be there. maybe a hole in the market.I really suggest to go the remote desktop route. There a lots of providers who offer Windows terminal server out of the box. If you all have good internet connections this is by far the best & easiest solution for what you are trying to achieve.
Multiple monitors is not a problem. It is supported by remote desktop. You should give it a try before dismissing it on forehand because I'm really sure a terminal server is by far the easiest solution for you. The internet bandwidth you stated is more than enough to use Altium remotely. I have designed chips using Xwindows over ISDN (64kbit).
3D is also supported. Using a graphic desktop remotely is 30 year old technology so all the problems have been ironed out long ago. By the time you have setup a fileserver and remote access over a VPN you can have the terminal server up and running 10 times over.
Where did you get that idea from? Internet has been optimised for low latency a long time ago due to online gaming.
Say you run a software program at 60Hz, you have 16.6ms between frames, 33.333ms at 30Hz. I can send packets in less than 7ms to/from a server if the server is well connected to Tier 1 backbones.
Say you run a software program at 60Hz, you have 16.6ms between frames, 33.333ms at 30Hz. I can send packets in less than 7ms to/from a server if the server is well connected to Tier 1 backbones.
Say you run a software program at 60Hz, you have 16.6ms between frames, 33.333ms at 30Hz. I can send packets in less than 7ms to/from a server if the server is well connected to Tier 1 backbones.
It'll be far more measurable if you're on a realistic connection and aren't practically sat on top of the datacentre.