mirror of
https://github.com/MonitorControl/MonitorControl.git
synced 2026-05-15 14:15:55 -06:00
[GH-ISSUE #678] Networked control #465
Labels
No labels
Status: Abandoned
arm64
beta
beta
bug
done
duplicate
enhancement
feedback needed from reporter
in progress
invalid
investigating
known Issue
monitor Issue
pull-request
translation
unable to reproduce
unreleased
x86
No milestone
No project
No assignees
1 participant
Notifications
Due date
No due date set.
Dependencies
No dependencies set.
Reference: github-starred/MonitorControl#465
Loading…
Add table
Add a link
Reference in a new issue
No description provided.
Delete branch "%!s()"
Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?
Originally created by @waydabber on GitHub (Oct 6, 2021).
Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/MonitorControl/MonitorControl/issues/678
Before opening the issue, have you...?
Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe
It would be great to add a simple client/server mode to the app + define a simple api and add an option to add devices via network control using various networked protocols (this is related to #287 as well). This could enable control of multiple mac displays from a single screen (which might not be a very convincing use case) and more importantly allow for AirPlay connected macs (used as external displays on Monterey as Macs now can basically act as Sidecars to each other, like the old Target Display mode) to have brightness control (which is a more convincing use case - let's think about all those 4K/5K Intel iMacs which will be obsolete within a few years but could still be great external displays for an Apple Silicon mac with a wired or wireless AirPlay connection).
Describe the solution you'd like
A simple option to enable listening on a port for control + an option to add a networked device on the 'Displays' tab (possibly renamed to 'Devices' in the future). Everything else should work the way it is working now, so the implementation would need any serious overhaul of the UI.
Describe alternatives you've considered
Not doing this.
Anything else?
No response
@JoniVR commented on GitHub (Oct 7, 2021):
I like the idea but I wonder if it's not a bit out-of-scope?
(Do few things and do them well vs do-it-all)
Would also possibly bring a few issues that would be purely related to ports being blocked, firewall settings, ...?
Still, interesting idea!
@waydabber commented on GitHub (Oct 7, 2021):
Well, I just popped it, I don't think it will be implemented any time soon. I'll convert this to a discussion with an 'Idea' tag on it and see if it gains traction.