[Gloucs] RealVNC Vs TightVNC

[Scarby]

or maybe ultraVNC perchance?

as far as realVNC not a big fan of the whole free (GPL) vs enterprise 
(commercial extras), especially when the enterprise features are 
available in free GPL'd alternatives (encryption being a huge issue for 
me, file transfer is also quite useful in certain situations.)

Adam Scarborough

Andrew M.A. Cater wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 08:03:05AM +0100, Glyn Davies wrote:
>   
>> Forgot to ask last night.
>>
>> RealVNC or TightVNC.
>>
>> But which is better.
>>
>> Only one way to find out. FIGHT!!!!
>>
>> Seriously, is one better than the other either technically or 
>> 'politically' (e.g. better open source credentials)?
>>
>> -- 
>> Best Regards
>> Glyn Davies
>>
>>     
>
> RealVNC was the first "fork" from the original Cambridge AT&T labs when 
> they folded IIRC.
>
> TightVNC - as it's name suggests - has had some speed improvements made 
> and may be a slightly more efficient codebase.
>
> Both essentially identical and interoperable. TightVNC originally 
> optimised for low bandwidth.
>
> AndyC
>
>   
>> _______________________________________________
>> gloucs mailing list
>> gloucs at mailman.lug.org.uk
>> https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/gloucs
>>     
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> gloucs mailing list
> gloucs at mailman.lug.org.uk
> https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/gloucs
>
>