TightVNC has been MUCH better than the stock VNC from AT&T for a couple of years now. RealVNC was a great step toward catching up with TightVNC, but it has a long way to go. Although RealVNC is just as good as Tight when running over a LAN, nothing touches TightVNC over low bandwidth connections, including PcAnyWhere. Terminal Services and Citrix are the only faster options.
RealVNC is usable over a cable connection, but TightVNC is much much faster and is even usable over dialup. I almost exclusivly use the Linux TightVNC client and have never had it crash on me. Greg Breland > TightVNC has major problems in its linux client. It dies at the most unpredictable > times... > > As for sending money... I have, in a small way, financially supported RealVNC. > RealVNC is the most reliable, stable of all the VNC's available. And I've tested > all the available vnc's that support linux. In fact, I'm so impressed with RealVNC > that I go out of my way to spread it to my customers and encourage them to > financially support the RealVNC effort. > > Nothing even comes close in the most important areas of vnc operations as named > above. Everything else is glitter, eye candy... a page out of the MicroSoft way of > programming. Anything to keep a version number ahead of the pack... Useless in a > work environment. _______________________________________________ VNC-List mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.realvnc.com/mailman/listinfo/vnc-list
