Using vnc like winframe

Niels Hansa n.hansa "at"
Thu, 23 Jul 1998 09:46:35 +0000

Jon Espenschied wrote:

> I think the question is this:  Can VNC be used to connect to a WTS/hydra
> box that is exporting displays to itself?  I.e., if a WTS box thinks is has
> three local displays supporting three sessions, can one connect three
> remote computers to those sessions via VNC (using *only* VNC for the
> "remoting" of the display)?

Thats exactely what I was getting at, since I think VNC perfomance
WTS/hydra's on dialup links. Thats what I am looking for.

> If this is possible, there are two primary types of benefit to explore:
> (a) Can one use this configuration to create a viable lightweight client?
> (Keeping in mind that VNC has even been ported to the Pilot, and it'll be a
> frosty day in hell before WTS clients approach that level of portability.)

M$ would not like to see this happening, but they might incorporate VNC 
technologie into their future clients, maybe even to Windows CE. I hope
ORL has copyrighted their innovation, so M$ has to pay a shitload of
USD for it ;-))
> (b) Can one legally avoid having to pay the full cost of Microsoft WTS
> client seats, if the display export (VNC server) and client (VNC) display
> are not Microsoft products?  This approach (which I neither defend nor
> criticize) is similar to the legal view that if you use a third-party
> TCP/IP stack and server products on NT Workstation, you aren't legally
> bound by the NT Workstation UELA limit of 10 inbound connections, nor are
> you obligated to buy client seats.  This is based on the premise that
> Microsoft has no legal basis to license, charge for, or limit the use of
> products they don't own.

Now thats an interessting point, which I, for one, didnt realize. But it 
seems logical, since one hase to purchase separate licences for NT
connections and for MS Exchange etc. But using VNC together with HYDRA
might still be an EULA violation, since there is a section covering this 
eventuality inside EULA for certain.
> Perhaps I've oversimplified, but it seems that the unspoken line of
> questioning in this thread basically boils down to "Can VNC give me more
> (portability, functionality, seats) for less ($, hassle)?"  I'd venture to
> say that a WinVNC server modified for WTS *and* a configuration carefully
> crafted around the WTS EULA could offer significant cost savings to those
> who choose to use Microsoft WTS.  Anyone have a copy of the WTS beta EULA
> handy?

It'll be interesting to follow this. I would also be interested in the
EULA. But rivaling MS HYDRA would be a better choice for ORL. Especially 
the cross-platform feature i very appealing.


The VNC mailing list     -   see