Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google Hangouts adds remote desktop support

plus.google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 80 posts

Re: Google Hangouts adds remote desktop support

#71

Post by djloche »

Ralz wrote: post #7

Am I the only one who prefers regular gchat to google hangouts? It's super difficult to figure out who on my contact list is online or not. I also mistake old msgs as new ones because of the lack of time-stamps. Maybe I'm missing a check-box or something that could fix all this but I gave up and switched back to gchat almost immediately.

As it is currently, Hangouts is not a real time communications service. It's a messaging service. Unfortunately for the Hangout team, Gmail is the superior messaging service.

The real shame is that Google already had a fantastic offering and they killed something beautiful: an integrated product that included a real time communication client (gchat), a messaging service (gmail), and a group/community based social network (g+).

Re: Google Hangouts adds remote desktop support

#72

Post by iso8859-1 »

sergiotapia wrote: post #49

The best remote desktop software I have used is - http://www.join.me Just have the other person click 'Share', wait a bit for it to load, then have them copy and paste their share URL. It works right in the browser and is free. If Google Hangouts make this easier for me to fix my mother's laptop I'm all for it!

http://www.screenleap.com/ is similar. It's a Java applet, works on Linux/Windows/Mac.

Re: Google Hangouts adds remote desktop support

#73

Post by kryten »

VikingCoder wrote: post #52
kryten wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are four entirely different credentials. Pain to remember, but it's definitely secure.

Doesn't one key-logger on the client computer reveal all of the passwords? That's one-factor authentication. Two-factor means you need two things, not just the passwords, but for instance also a device. You mentioned a remote key, so yes, it sounds like you have two-factor. But not four.

I have a signify key as well so yes it is minimally two-factor.

Fair point about the keylogger. I didn't consider that - it's not my network to worry about :)

Re: Google Hangouts adds remote desktop support

#74

Post by ralphm »

simoncion wrote: post #47
shmerl wrote: post #6

When are they going to publish their protocol, or return support for XMPP federation? Users should avoid them until they do either of those.

ATM XMPP federation is still up and running. If enough people approach the Messaging folks at Google with coherent, well-reasoned reasons for leaving it up (and perhaps securing it with TLS!), then it might get left up for good.

Sorry, but the new Hangouts does not support federation. The old GTalk network, though, does. If a message comes into the latter from non-Google servers, they only show up in connected XMPP clients, not on Android or GMail after upgrading to Hangouts. If the intended recipient does not use a 3rd party XMPP client and has fully upgraded, he will never see the message!

For outbound traffic some odd stuff is going on. Presence from all Hangouts endpoints still propagates to GTalk and thus federates. Messages can also be sent. But again, that's one way and replies are not delivered to Hangouts. Additionally, XMPP iq-type requests to Hangouts endpoints are not responded to, violating the core XMPP spec.

Re: Google Hangouts adds remote desktop support

#75

Post by rogerchucker »

cheald wrote: post #38
drivebyacct2 wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is why I suspect they've drug their feet on Google Voice integration. They want to make that seamless. You want to call [Person] and you shouldn't have to even think about whether it's over Hangouts or PTSN. That's what Google Voice will give them. You call them from the Hangouts app and they pass it through Google Voice if they're not signed into any Hangout machines. It roughly works this way already for exist…

Calls incoming to my Google Voice number already ring in Hangouts for me - I actually use that any time I have to do phone conferencing now, since I can just use my computer headset rather than futzing with a phone headset.

That's actually good. But the issue I was highlighting was about making calls. Not that Hangouts cannot make a phone call - it's just that I don't want to remember all the numbers of my contacts.

Re: Google Hangouts adds remote desktop support

#76

Post by aroch »

timdorr wrote: post #55
clarkm wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I complained about this for a while, but then I saw someone use Hangouts on mobile. I suddenly realized why Google designed it this way. Of course the designers noticed that it was hard to determine who was offline and who was online. In fact, that's the whole point. Google is incrementally eliminating the distinction between the online and offline world. Pretty soon, the concept of offline won't exist anymore -- eve…

In fact, they will be integrating SMS "soon": http://www.engadget.com/2013/05/16/google-hangouts-sms-integ...

And yet GVoice probably still won't support MMS, it'll be forced to the hangouts protocol and you'd be screwed if you want to send an MMS to a non-Android phone.

Re: Google Hangouts adds remote desktop support

#77

Post by MichaelGG »

mparlane wrote: post #65
MichaelGG wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, two users behind a proper NAT or firewall won't be able to use this feature?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hole_punching tada.

Yeah that's not a general solution, that's just exploiting problems in particular NAT implementations.

Re: Google Hangouts adds remote desktop support

#79

Post by MichaelGG »

mparlane wrote: post #78
MichaelGG wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah that's not a general solution, that's just exploiting problems in particular NAT implementations.

Skype did just fine with it.

Incorrect. Skype relays media via other users when two users cannot directly connect. So if you and I are behind proper NATs, and no negotiation works, then we agree on a nearby (super?)node that is accessible, and relay media through there.

Hole punching _can_ work, but again, it's exploiting implementation quirks in NAT devices and isn't a general solution (though it might do pretty well).

The only standard way (AFAIK) to open up NAT is via UPNP, which the client software (and NAT device) needs to support. The client then talks to the NAT device and tells it to port forward. It seems pretty common nowaday, and is more elegant and secure than the hacky "poke around and see what works" implementations.

Re: Google Hangouts adds remote desktop support

#80

Post by mparlane »

MichaelGG wrote: post #79
mparlane wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Skype did just fine with it.

Incorrect. Skype relays media via other users when two users cannot directly connect. So if you and I are behind proper NATs, and no negotiation works, then we agree on a nearby (super?)node that is accessible, and relay media through there. Hole punching _can_ work, but again, it's exploiting implementation quirks in NAT devices and isn't a general solution (though it might do pretty well). The only standard way (AF…

http://www.h-online.com/security/features/How-Skype-Co-get-r...

Note the date, things are very different now.

Post reply on HN