--On Montag, 15. Juli 2002 13:53 -0700 Louis Erickson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> -----Original Message----- >> From: Steven J. Sobol [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >> Sent: Monday, July 15, 2002 9:11 AM >> To: Justin Tibbs >> Cc: Matthew Carpenter; [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Subject: Re: windows ssh client >> >> >> On Wed, 26 Jun 2002, Justin Tibbs wrote: >> >> > I use PuTTY which has turned out to be a great client, can >> find it by >> > searching in google, its a self contained Client .exe >> file.. not dlls >> > etc.. just my two cents. >> >> http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/putty >> >> Requires absolutely no DLLs to run, and is only 330K. It's wonderful. >> > > PuTTY is an excellent program. It works well, is free, and is easy for an > administrator to move from machine to machine. > > It does have some disadvantages. The user interface is odd. Well, I'd call it plain and simple. Seems nowdays this appears odd to some ;-) Anyway, how much ui do you need for a client for a text mode application? The idea is to be as transparent as possible, isn't it? And beyond this, cut and paste works, and can be configured in unix or windows style, you can save your colour and font settings, and much more than I usually use. > Not neccisarily bad, but different than most, and counter-intuitive > in several places. Well, different than the overloaded office suites and "multimedia" programs, yes. And very pleasantly different! The day PuTTY develops a gui like, say, winzip, with fancy spacewasting buttons, custom windows shapes and the such, I'll drop it asap! Screen space is limited. I need to work on the _remote_ machine and so I'd like to see as less as possible from the local machine. But your mileage may vary, certainly. Ok, admitted, there are one or two very minor issues in the config area where the handling could be slighly cleared, but a) it's easy to figure out and b) you don't configure an ssh client too often, do you? > The "all in one exe" is good for people who need to stick it on a > box quickly, but not as good if you want to deploy it enterprise wide. > You wind up having to do some things to make it visible to the user, > which a normal setup program does. The user-education curve is steep and > difficult. Is this a problem? IIRC there's a hook in the win installer to add additional progs while installing, and a "no config dialog just copy files" type programm is perfect for this, isn't it? (I remember doing this in w95, and I'm pretty sure I figured out how have a link on start menu and desktop, too. Sorry, can't remember the details, but it should be even easier with 2K etc by now.) > If you want novice or non-technical users to use SSH successfully, you > might consider a program which has a more traditional Windows UI, and > does things like show up in the Start menu and installs and uninstalls > "normally" via a setup program and the control panel's Remove tool. Maybe someput puts a .inf file together for copying etc? > I've had good experiences with CRT, and have heard SecureCRT is as good. > VanDyke offers several interesting SSH-related products. > http://www.vandyke.com/. > > Everything is a trade-off. PuTTY is small, simple, and free, but it's UI > is strange and installing it is a mystery for "normal" users. SecureCRT > has a polished UI, supports more termianl emulations, and is a "normal" > Windows application, but it costs money. I personally found scrt pretty confusing, and I *am* an experienced win user. But it might they might have streamlined it by now. BTW. For PuTTY's scp, there are explorer-like GUI tools. Cheers, Marcel Hicking
