UltraVNC is born...
Fri Dec 6 05:44:00 2002
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.
> TightVNC has major problems in its linux client. It dies at the most unpredictable
> 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.