How To Have 2 VMS Users Connected To The Same PC?

From a member:

We are trying not to add a second workstation in small room but we have an issue with too much work going on for one work station. Staff are waiting to access the machine to review recorded video, key in case info, check email, watch live video, etc.

Anyone have any history with using a revere KVM type device to extend the end users desk top and allow multiple instances of a VMS application to be ran and controlled by two diff users? For example, one user would be on the PC entering case information while the other has a PTZ pulled up on a second monitor and can control it. Something like this.

Advice?


For example, one user would be on the PC entering case information while the other has a PTZ pulled up on a second monitor and can control it.

It doesn't work like that, there may be 4 mice but there is only ONE mouse pointer.

Press Mode button to cycle through all four modes. LEDs indicate which mode is selected.

  • User 1 Mode–only User 1 can type or move mouse.
  • User 2 Mode–only User 2 can type or move mouse.
  • User 3 Mode–only User 3 can type or move mouse.
  • User 4 Mode–only User 4 can type or move mouse.
  • Inst Mode–keyboard or mouse activates immediately
  • Delay Mode–locked out user must wait five seconds after last keystroke or mouse movement occurs on active user.

Smaller than the KVM box, and without having to run long KVM cables is something like:

Shareing multible keyboards with one computer is easy but I don't think you can use mutlible keyboards and mice and the same time.

I Intel NUCs are super small and could be mounted on the back of a monitor. They would take up no more room then a KVM. Just a thought

One thing to keep in mind with the NUC's is that the graphics and Proccessing on them are not really optimized for Video Playback.

Haven't used Intels NUC line, but Brix makes some high performing "bricks", like this one with triple monitors (one 4K), and Nvidia GeForce GTX 760 graphics.

$850 here.

That is an impressive spec for such a small machine! Thank you for posting this, I was not aware they had produced something quite that impressive in the NUC form factor.

Intel really pushes the NUCs for multi media PCs,digital signage and video surveillance. Some even have 4K video output.

http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/nuc/nuc-video-surveillance-poster.html

translation " we are trying to get out cheap"

answer " no you cant"

What they want is known as a multiseat configuration. It's not a new concept, but was more popular when computing hardware was much more expensive then it is now. Today it would probably cost you as much in time and man-hours to get it all configured as just buying another CPU.

You could make this work with a VM setup, having multiple USB keyboards and mice, and then manually configuring them in VM setup to bind to a specific VM. I have not done this specifically, but I have done things like configure a USB Ethernet dongle to only be attached to a Windows VM and not a linux VM on the same host.

Chances are though that the host PC they currently have wouldn't be sufficient to properly support 2 VMs with acceptable performance, especially for VMS stuff. So, they're going to end up buying another PC anyway...

You could make this work with a VM setup, having multiple USB keyboards and mice, and then manually configuring them in VM setup to bind to a specific VM. I have not done this specifically, but I have done things like configure a USB Ethernet dongle to only be attached to a Windows VM and not a linux VM on the same host.

How do you bind the display to the VM? By using a USB monitor?

A couple of things. First, we have had serious problems with the Intel NUCs (mainly driver issues) and don't use them anymore. Dell's 3020M is a little bigger, but you can buy that and a monitor mount for less than the components to put a NUC together. And they have the OS installed already.

My other question is whether or not Windows Remote Desktop from another PC is an option? They mentioned a second workstation, so there is another computer there. The only issue would be concurrent connections to Windows, but we use a free utility that patches Windows 7 to operate as a server OS. This allows me to RDC in with a different user account without disrupting the first.

I'm sure this violates Windows licensing or something, but whatever....

They mentioned a second workstation, so there is another computer there.

I think there is just one so far:

We are trying not to add a second workstation in small room but we have an issue with too much work going on for one work station.

The easiest, and cheapest way long term is a second PC. If they want to McGuyver a solution, some people like banging their heads on brick walls, it will almost surely cost more over time, be it replacing non-performing components or man hours.

Here is a little tip from your Uncle Lar!

K (eep)

I (t)

S (imple)

S (tupid)

Simple, cost effective, well performing solutions will never get you fired. Thinking outside of the box and creating a new problem will.

Thinking outside of the box and creating a new problem will.

Couldn't agree more!

Too many people thinking 'out of the box' these days who couldn't think their way out of a paper bag.

Not to distract from the main point of the conversation, being this solution itself, however, what about a VMS that is browser based and allows for multiple types of operating systems, so to allow for different clients instead of another PC?

Depending on the needs of the infrastructure, if a wireless AP were allowed, non broadcasting of course, in the control room, users could connect on a browser based client using smart phones, tablets, etc rather than being locked into a "PC" for the client.

Not that this would be a solution in this case; ripping out the VMS and putting in something else, but designed from the beginning would offer some flexibility.

Just a thought.

...if a wireless AP were allowed, non broadcasting of course...

Not sure what this means, but I will assume you mean not broadcasting the SSID. That does not keep the network any more secure than broadcasting the SSID. Anyone capable of hacking a WiFi signal can easily find a network without the SSID being broadcast. It only keeps non-tech people from finding the network, of which are the least of your worries.

I don't disagree at all, and you are correct. I didn't want to start a completely new discussion, especially around the security (or insecurity) of wireless in a video security system. That portion of the comment, yes, was not broadcasting the SSID, and while it doesn't add any security if someone wants in, I'm not sure what this user's application is and how secure their system is. It does in my mind, of course, sound more secure than anything I'd ever suggest a wireless AP in, as they have that many users on the system. (or is it in a bunker under 25 feet of concrete).

My question was more centered around building out a system in the first place that allows for more fleixibilty in clients, rather than the (dare I say) "traditional" Windows client requiring a PC.

Again, not any solution for this customer without driving up costs of new software or hardware to tackle the situation, but thoughts about systems that can alleviate these headaches ahead of time.

Input welcomed.

...however, what about a VMS that is browser based and allows for multiple types of operating systems, so to allow for different clients instead of another PC?

Well, since most VMSes already support some type of mobile access, he may already be using a mobile client or two.

And there is reason to believe the OP actually wants a desktop workstation as opposed to an tablet. Why?

Because even with today's 5 inch retina displays, there is just something oh so nice about a 30 inch monitor, esp. when viewing multiple windows.

And as sophisticated as the gesture detection is today, for some tasks there is nothing quite as easy as the humble mouse.

And as impressive as Swifty is at determining your swipe, I'd still take an IBM 101 keyboard with a solid click instead.

Sorry if I came off snarky, I just didn't want others to feel safer with the SSID broadcasting disabled on their networks.