Beware of TightVNC. One thing I like about RealVNC on a Mac is that I can
configure it to put up a timed window to approve the password protected
connection. VNC on the Mac is unfortunately only the primary desktop (:0) so I
don't like the idea of lots of people I collaborate with, who know my
I believe UltraVNC only works on MSWindows.
-Original Message-
From: vnc-list-boun...@realvnc.com [mailto:vnc-list-boun...@realvnc.com]
On Behalf Of Dale Eshelman
Sent: Monday, March 14, 2011 10:45 AM
To: Constantin Kaplinsky
Cc: B. Scott Smith; Seth Callen; vnc-list@realvnc.com
Subject:
Can anyone recommend a good VNC server for Win7? I have Real and Tight and
when I connect to them, they seem REALLY SLOW!! The screen updates just
seem to take forever. Its not bandwidth because I can connect to XP
machines and the speed is just fine. Even the Win7 computer on the desk
next to
Thanks,
On the Windows OS would one be better to use free UltaVNC server and client
than Real?
What is the advantage of UltraVNC?
Then on Mac OS I would stick with my Vine Server and Chicken of the VNC (Real
VNC based).
Does UltraVNC play nice with the Vine Server / Chicken of the VNC on the
Yep - the main reason we are still on XP is W7. 64-bit version slower than
32-bit version on respective platforms. Then the IE9 mess of 64-bit
incompatibilities and 32-bit running faster than 64-bit.
Someone took Microsoft into emergency surgery and installed a pace maker to
keep them going
Dale:
We use UltraVNC on our Windows machines, and it's free as far as I
know (I'm not involved in licensing and that kind of noise). I
have had better luck with the UVNC server than with the Real one,
but the vncviewer works about the same. RealVNC maintains the
protocol, and when UVNC,
