Two Simultaneous Users on One Computer?

Fri Mar 30, 2007 12:31PM EDT

See Comments (16)

Reader Jason Beech writes: I have a new PC with a GX2 video card. Is it possible to buy a second monitor, keyboard, and mouse and have two true desktops? Different users of course... so I can be surfing the net and my wife can be working on Photoshop at the same time?

I have good news and bad news for you, Jason.

First the good news: Yes, this is possible with a PC. In fact, it's free if you just want to have two users. Userful's Desktop Multiplier lets you do exactly what you're asking about: Plug in two monitors, keyboards, and mice, and two different people can use a single PC as if they were each using their own computer. In fact, Desktop Multiplier can scale up to supporting 10 users at the same time, if you have enough video cards. (If this sounds familiar, be careful: This is not the same as using one monitor/keyboard/mouse to control multiple computers. That requires a wholly different solution involving a KVM switch, a commonly available product.)

Now the bad news: It only runs on Linux, and there's nothing like this that I've ever seen for Windows. Are you willing to install an entirely new operating system just to be able to allow two users on the machine at the same time? If so, check out the Desktop Server version of Linux, which includes Desktop Multiplier as part of the default installation.

Is it worth it? I have to admit the technology sounds elegant and appealing, but with new PCs available for $399 or even $299 (and used ones even cheaper), what's the point? You're already going to have to buy another monitor... why not just set up a second, super-cheap PC that can be used for web browsing, light word processing, and the like. Two PCs also makes for a neat solution for doing data backups, as you can sync your files between the two computers.

Sorry it's probably not the answer you were looking for, but I hope it's helpful nonetheless.

Comments on Two Simultaneous Users on One Computer?

Post a Comment

Join in the discussion. Here you'll see the comments in the order they were posted.

  • 1 Posted by pocketdoom on Thu Sep 3, 2009 8:15PM EDT Report Abuse

    So in an old job we had dumb terminals. That was where you had the terminal with the keyboard running software off of a main computer in the back. With the advances in technology, we are not able to do something that we could do 20 years ago. I find that deplorable.

  • 2 Posted by polkfb on Thu Sep 3, 2009 8:16PM EDT Report Abuse

    how do you hook up 2 computes together,so you can transfur..one to the 2 one .whith one monitor/keyboard/mouse

  • 3 Posted by commorancy on Thu Sep 3, 2009 3:28PM EDT Report Abuse

    Linux (as a UNIX variant) is a fully multitasking and, more importantly, a fully multiple simultaneous user operating system. So, yes, it's very easy (with the right amount of hardware) to set up multiple completely separate interfaces to the same computer with Linux (or any UNIX). This feature has been available for years and years as a built-in standard. Once set up, all apps should work within each session properly unless the application has been designed specifically not to. Windows, on the other hand, has been primarily designed as a single user desktop system. Yes, if you buy Server edition, you can set up terminal services and remote into the server as a multiuser. But, this requires buying the expensive ($800 or more) Server edition of the Windows operating system and having two other computers/terminal services clients, in addition to the server. That means buying a server and at least two thin client computers or two full-fledged computers to run terminal services client. With the ncomputing device (a third party product) that was mentioned above, this may also be a terminal services client or thin client. This may also require a windows Server edition to function properly. Keep in mind that Windows' userspace isn't always 100% separate from other users and many applications are not designed to work in a multiuser framework. So, you may find some very simple applications that won't work under Terminal Services. Microsoft has never really focused Windows to become an optimal multiuser system. It's just not that lucrative. It's more lucrative to get people to buy a bunch of individual computers (and OS licenses) than buying one license and having multiple people share that same computer. Time shared computing has its places (especially in labs or where space/heat is a factor). But, Windows has not really taken the plunge to do multiuser effectively and properly. Of course, third party companies like Citrix and Ncomputing have found niches in providing a somewhat workable solution. But, you'll still be at the mercy of the Windows OS lack of full multiuser support and, thus, you are likely to constantly bump your head against it (even using products like ncomputing).

  • 4 Posted by commorancy on Thu Sep 3, 2009 3:28PM EDT Report Abuse

    Of course, even if you manage to get a thin client working properly, such as what ncomputing offers, one user can still crash the other. Linux/UNIX takes great pains to ensure that one user (in a multiuser situation) cannot easily crash the computer or the other user with user space applications. Windows, on the other hand, doesn't really go to that extreme. So, if someone is surfing on the Internet and another is doing Photoshop, it is possible to completely crash the server machine with these user space applications. This, of course, means that every party using that same computer will lose all of their work. Just something to be wary of if trying to use Windows as a multiuser system.

  • 5 Posted by thekclyon on Thu Sep 3, 2009 10:04PM EDT Report Abuse

    Awesome! Me and all 4 of my friends can browse the internet for porn and rub one out in the same room! "Hey, buddy, click rewind for me will ya?"

  • 6 Posted by jetbruceli on Thu Sep 3, 2009 4:34PM EDT Report Abuse

    Hey, the 7950 gx2 was designed to run in sli for better gaming, if runnig seperate, it enables you to run video in dualview. Nvidia mainly makes video cards for hardcore gaming.

  • 7 Posted by ccmailbox06 on Thu Sep 3, 2009 3:20PM EDT Report Abuse

    We just got a laptop hooked up with wireless internet service through Time Warner's Roadrunner fast dialup. Its great, the only problem is that they said we can only hook up one pc (wireless or desktop) to it. This seems absurd, especially with the many options that wireless technology can provide. Can we work around this to have our desktop be recognized by the wireless network (or vice versa)? We would really like to utlize our older desktop (has Windows XP) with the wireless internet service. Thanks.

  • 8 Posted by commorancy on Thu Sep 3, 2009 3:28PM EDT Report Abuse

    ccmailbox06, I'm assuming the Roadrunner connectivity is wired (i.e., cable modem). If so, hook the cable modem up to an Internet Router (Dlink and Linksys both make Internet routers with or without WiFi.. cheaper with WiFi, tho). The router will connect directly to Roadrunner pretending to be the single PC (on the router's WAN port). Then, you connect each actual PC to the router via ethernet or WiFi (on the LAN / WLAN ports) and the router will issue each LAN/WLAN connected computer each their own IP address (completely separate from Roadrunner). So, you'll be able to connect as many computers as the router offers LAN ports (usually 4 physical ports and as many WiFi clients as you like). If the connectivity you're speaking about uses WiFi to connect to RoadRunner, I'm not exactly sure how that would work. There may be routers that can act as a gateway to WiFi-only Internet service, but I haven't had to deal with that as yet. Check www.dlink.com or www.linksys.com for more details on routers if Roadrunner is now using WiFi for internet connectivity. I'm assuming Roadrunner is still only providing cable modems, though. Good luck.

  • 9 Posted by youmember2001 on Thu Sep 3, 2009 10:57PM EDT Report Abuse

    You never said if this package for a Linux distribution's was given away as a binary and/or source, if it is given away as source then you should be more than able to compile it under a Mac OS X system providing you can satisfy any dependences. Also, you never discussed options such as dual booting windows and linux which I am doing currently, the installation is usually painless.

More Posts: First Prev 1 2 Next Last

Post a Comment

Sign In to Post a Comment