skip to main content
research-article

On the Performance Comparisons of Native and Clientless Real-Time Screen-Sharing Technologies

Published: 29 May 2021 Publication History

Abstract

Real-time screen-sharing provides users with ubiquitous access to remote applications, such as computer games, movie players, and desktop applications (apps), anywhere and anytime. In this article, we study the performance of different screen-sharing technologies, which can be classified into native and clientless ones. The native ones dictate that users install special-purpose software, while the clientless ones directly run in web browsers. In particular, we conduct extensive experiments in three steps. First, we identify a suite of the most representative native and clientless screen-sharing technologies. Second, we propose a systematic measurement methodology for comparing screen-sharing technologies under diverse and dynamic network conditions using different performance metrics. Last, we conduct extensive experiments and perform in-depth analysis to quantify the performance gap between clientless and native screen-sharing technologies. We found that our WebRTC-based implementation achieves the best overall performance. More precisely, it consumes a maximum of 3 Mbps bandwidth while reaching a high decoding ratio and delivering good video quality. Moreover, it leads to a steadily high decoding ratio and video quality under dynamic network conditions. By presenting the very first rigorous comparisons of the native and clientless screen-sharing technologies, this article will stimulate more exciting studies on the emerging clientless screen-sharing technologies.

Supplementary Material

a54-huang-apndx.pdf (huang.zip)
Supplemental movie, appendix, image and software files for, On the Performance Comparisons of Native and Clientless Real-Time Screen-Sharing Technologies

References

[1]
Maha Abdallah, Carsten Griwodz, Kuan-Ta Chen, Gwendal Simon, Pin-Chun Wang, and Cheng-Hsin Hsu. 2018. Delay-sensitive video computing in the cloud: A survey. ACM Trans. Multimedia Comput. Commun. Applic. 14, 3s (2018), 54:1–54:29.
[2]
Doreid. Ammar, Katrien De Moor, Min Xie, Markus Fiedler, and Poul Heegaard. 2016. Video QoE killer and performance statistics in WebRTC-based video communication. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Communications and Electronics (ICCE’16). 429–436.
[3]
Daniel Beer. 2019. QR Decoder Library. Retrieved from https://github.com/dlbeer/quirc.
[4]
Sumohana S. Channappayya, Alan C. Bovik, Constantine Caramanis, and Robert W. Heath. 2008. SSIM-optimal linear image restoration. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP’08). 765–768.
[5]
Hao Chen, Xu Zhang, Yiling Xu, Ju Ren, Jingtao Fan, Zhan Ma, and Wenjun Zhang. 2019. T-gaming: A cost-efficient cloud gaming system at scale. IEEE Trans. Parallel Distrib. Syst. 30, 12 (2019), 2849–2865.
[6]
Mark Claypool and Kajal Claypool. 2010. Latency can kill: Precision and deadline in online games. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGMM Conference on Multimedia Systems (MMSys’10). 215–222.
[7]
Mark Claypool and David Finkel. 2014. The effects of latency on player performance in cloud-based games. In Proceedings of the ACM Workshop on Network and Systems Support for Games (NetGames’14). 1–6.
[8]
Mark Claypool, Tianhe Wang, and McIntyre Watts. 2015. A taxonomy for player actions with latency in network games. In Proceedings of the ACM Workshop on Network and Operating Systems Support for Digital Audio and Video (NOSSDAV’15). 67–72.
[9]
Denso Wave Incorporated. 2019. QRcode.com | Denso Wave. Retrieved from https://www.qrcode.com/.
[10]
FFmpeg Team. 2019. FFmpeg. Retrieved from http://ffmpeg.org/.
[11]
Rama Rao Ganji, Mihai Mitrea, Dancho Panovski, and Bojan Joveski. 2016. Improving the RDP based applications by using HTML5 content representation. Electron. Imag. 2016 (Feb. 2016), 1–7.
[12]
Boni García, Luis López-Fernández, Micael Gallego, and Francisco Gortázar. 2016. Testing framework for WebRTC services. In Proceedings of the EAI International Conference on Mobile Multimedia Communications (MobiMedia’16). 40–47.
[13]
GlavSoft LLC. 2019. TightVNC: VNC-Compatible Free Remote Control / Remote Desktop Software. Retrieved from https://www.tightvnc.com/.
[14]
Google. 2019. Stadia. Retrieved from https://stadia.dev/.
[15]
Chih-Fan Hsu, De-Yu Chen, Chun-Ying Huang, Cheng-Hsin Hsu, and Kuan-Ta Chen. 2014. Screencast in the wild: Performance and limitations. In Proceedings of the ACM International Conference on Multimedia (MM’14). 813–816.
[16]
Chih-Fan Hsu, Ching-Ling Fan, Tsung-Han Tsai, Chun-Ying Huang, Cheng-Hsin Hsu, and Kuan-Ta Chen. 2016. Toward an adaptive screencast platform: Measurement and optimization. ACM Trans. Multimedia Comput. Commun. Applic. 12, 5s (2016), 79:1–79:23.
[17]
Chih-Fan Hsu, Tsung-Han Tsai, Chun-Ying Huang, Cheng-Hsin Hsu, and Kuan-Ta Chen. 2015. Screencast dissected: Performance measurements and design considerations. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGMM Conference on Multimedia Systems (MMsys’15). 177–188.
[18]
Chun-Ying Huang, Kuan-Ta Chen, De-Yu Chen, Hwai-Jung Hsu, and Cheng-Hsin Hsu. 2014. GamingAnywhere: The first open source cloud gaming system. ACM Trans. Multimedia Comput. Commun. Applic. 10, 1s (Jan. 2014), 10:1–10:25.
[19]
ISO/IEC 16022:2006(E) 2006. Information Technology—Automatic Identification and Data Capture Techniques—Data Matrix Bar Code Symbology Specification. Standard. International Organization for Standardization/International Electrotechnical Commission.
[20]
Benjamin F. Janzen and Robert J. Teather. 2014. Is 60 FPS better than 30?: The impact of frame rate and latency on moving target selection. In Proceedings of the the Extended Abstracts of ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA’14). 1477–1482.
[21]
Youming Lin, Teemu Kämäräinen, Mario Di Francesco, and Antti Ylä-Jääski. 2015. Performance evaluation of remote display access for mobile cloud computing. Comput. Commun. 72 (2015), 17–25.
[22]
Luis López, Miguel París, Santiago Carot, Boni García, Micael Gallego, Francisco Gortázar, Raul Benítez, Jose A. Santos, David Fernández, Radu Tom Vlad, Iván Gracia, and Francisco Javier López. 2016. Kurento: The WebRTC modular media server. In Proceedings of the ACM International Conference on Multimedia (MM’16). 1187–1191.
[23]
Joel Martin. 2019. noVNC. Retrieved from https://novnc.com/info.html.
[24]
Microsoft Corp. 2018. Remote Desktop Protocol. Retrieved from https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/desktop/termserv/remote-desktop-protocol.
[25]
Microsoft Corp. 2019. Use Remote Assistance to Let Someone Fix Your PC. Retrieved from https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/help/4026516/windows-use-remote-assistance-to-let-someone-fix-your-pc.
[26]
MinGW.org. 2019. MinGW | Minimalist GNU for Windows. Retrieved from http://www.mingw.org/.
[27]
Miniwatts Marketing Group. 2019. World Internet Users Statistics and 2019 World Population Stats. Retrieved from www.internetworldstats.com/stats.htm.
[28]
Yasuhiro Mochida, Daisuke Shirai, and Tatsuya Fujii. 2016. Novel web-based remote collaboration system architecture for wider use cases. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Supporting Group Work (GROUP’16). 437–440.
[29]
Davide Mulfari, Antonio Celesti, Massimo Villari, and Antonio Puliafito. 2014. Using virtualization and noVNC to support assistive technology in cloud computing. In Proceedings of the IEEE Symposium on Network Cloud Computing and Applications (NCCA’14). 125–132.
[30]
Hyunwoo Nam, Kyung-Hwa Kim, and Henning Schulzrinne. 2016. QoE matters more than QoS: Why people stop watching cat videos. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Computer Communications (INFOCOM’16). 1–9.
[31]
NVIDIA. 2019. Game Anywhere on Your Mac, Windows PC, or SHIELD Device with NVIDIA’s Cloud Gaming Service. Retrieved from https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce/products/geforce-now/.
[32]
Tristan Richardson, Quentin Stafford-Fraser, Kenneth R. Wood, and Andy Hopper. 1998. Virtual network computing. IEEE Internet Comput. 2 (Feb. 1998), 33–38.
[33]
Ron Sharp. 2012. Latency in cloud-based interactive streaming content. Bell Labs Tech. J. 17, 2 (Sept. 2012), 67–80.
[34]
Nathan Sheldon, Eric Girard, Seth Borg, Mark Claypool, and Emmanuel Agu. 2003. The effect of latency on user performance in Warcraft III. In Proceedings of the ACM Workshop on Network and System Support for Games (NetGames’03). 3–14.
[35]
Shu Shi, Cheng Hsu, Klara Nahrstedt, and Roy Campbell. 2011. Using graphics rendering contexts to enhance the real-time video coding for mobile cloud gaming. Proceedings of the ACM International Conference on Multimedia (MM’11)103–112.
[36]
Shu Shi and Cheng-Hsin Hsu. 2015. A survey of interactive remote rendering systems. Comput. Surv. 47, 4 (2015), 57:1–57:29.
[37]
Sony Interactive Entertainment. 2019. PS4 Remote Play Windows PC/Mac. Retrieved from https://remoteplay.dl.playstation.net/remoteplay/lang/en/index.html.
[38]
Matthias Ueberheide, Felix Klose, Tilak Varisetty, Markus Fidler, and Marcus Magnor. 2015. Web-based interactive free-viewpoint streaming: A framework for high quality interactive free viewpoint navigation. In Proceedings of the ACM International Conference on Multimedia (MM’15). 1031–1034.
[39]
Valve Corporation. 2019. Steam In-Home Streaming. Retrieved from https://store.steampowered.com/streaming/.
[40]
WebRTC. 2019. WebRTC Home | WebRTC. Retrieved from https://webrtc.org/.
[41]
Li Yan. 2011. Development and application of desktop virtualization technology. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Communication Software and Networks (ICCCN’11). 326–329.
[42]
Youhui Zhang, Peng Qu, Jiang Cihang, and Weimin Zheng. 2015. A cloud gaming system based on user-level virtualization and its resource scheduling. IEEE Trans. Parallel Distrib. Syst. 27, 5 (2015), 1239–1252.

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)Desarrollo de una Herramienta Educativa Inalámbrica Basada en Raspberry PiINGENIO10.29166/ingenio.v7i1.56307:1(13-22)Online publication date: 14-Feb-2024
  • (2024)A systematic review on WebRTC for potential applications and challenges beyond audio video streamingMultimedia Tools and Applications10.1007/s11042-024-20448-984:6(2909-2946)Online publication date: 23-Nov-2024
  • (2021)Towards a Clustering Guided Hierarchical Framework for Sensor-Based Activity RecognitionSensors10.3390/s2121696221:21(6962)Online publication date: 20-Oct-2021

Index Terms

  1. On the Performance Comparisons of Native and Clientless Real-Time Screen-Sharing Technologies

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Information & Contributors

      Information

      Published In

      cover image ACM Transactions on Multimedia Computing, Communications, and Applications
      ACM Transactions on Multimedia Computing, Communications, and Applications  Volume 17, Issue 2
      May 2021
      410 pages
      ISSN:1551-6857
      EISSN:1551-6865
      DOI:10.1145/3461621
      Issue’s Table of Contents
      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      Published: 29 May 2021
      Accepted: 01 November 2020
      Revised: 01 August 2020
      Received: 01 February 2020
      Published in TOMM Volume 17, Issue 2

      Permissions

      Request permissions for this article.

      Check for updates

      Author Tags

      1. Live video streaming
      2. measurements
      3. performance evaluations
      4. performance optimization
      5. real-time encoding

      Qualifiers

      • Research-article
      • Research
      • Refereed

      Funding Sources

      • Ministry of Science and Technology of Taiwan
      • NOVATEK Fellowship

      Contributors

      Other Metrics

      Bibliometrics & Citations

      Bibliometrics

      Article Metrics

      • Downloads (Last 12 months)25
      • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
      Reflects downloads up to 03 Mar 2025

      Other Metrics

      Citations

      Cited By

      View all
      • (2024)Desarrollo de una Herramienta Educativa Inalámbrica Basada en Raspberry PiINGENIO10.29166/ingenio.v7i1.56307:1(13-22)Online publication date: 14-Feb-2024
      • (2024)A systematic review on WebRTC for potential applications and challenges beyond audio video streamingMultimedia Tools and Applications10.1007/s11042-024-20448-984:6(2909-2946)Online publication date: 23-Nov-2024
      • (2021)Towards a Clustering Guided Hierarchical Framework for Sensor-Based Activity RecognitionSensors10.3390/s2121696221:21(6962)Online publication date: 20-Oct-2021

      View Options

      Login options

      Full Access

      View options

      PDF

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader

      HTML Format

      View this article in HTML Format.

      HTML Format

      Figures

      Tables

      Media

      Share

      Share

      Share this Publication link

      Share on social media