On Saturday 01 April 2006 22:29, Alexander Skwar wrote: > BTW: Why use tightvnc at all? Realvnc 4 is as fast in > my experience and there's still somebody workign on it - > seeing that the last update to tightvnc is dated > July 2005, I doubt that anybody maintains it anymore. > Realvnc lacks jpeg support, which certainly helps with slow connections.
-- Rick van Hattem Rick.van.Hattem(at)Fawo.nl
pgphFce3360Vt.pgp
Description: PGP signature
