Hello, >>>>> "DD" == Dave Dyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> I don't suppose you might consider using TightVNC instead of WinVNC >> as your base code, would you? TightVNC is actively being developed, >> has many more features, less bugs and is more stable than WinVNC. DD> I have made the "please incorporate this technology" overture to DD> both VNC and TightVNC, but there has been no response. Lobby them. I don't mind to include encryption into TightVNC, and I think this is a very important task, but I'll have to decide what technologies / standards / libraries to use, and how to preserve compatibility between any combination of server and viewer versions. Unfortunately, this work would take some time, so I cannot promise that I'm about to incorporate ZVNC changes right now. -- With Best Wishes, Constantin --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the line: 'unsubscribe vnc-list' in the message BODY See also: http://www.uk.research.att.com/vnc/intouch.html ---------------------------------------------------------------------
