Re: Why the switch from TightVNC to RealVNC?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

To: For users of Fedora Core releases <fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Why the switch from TightVNC to RealVNC?
From: Timothy Ha <linuxmail@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 07:09:18 +0300
In-reply-to: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
Reply-to: For users of Fedora Core releases <fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.9 (Windows/20041103)

Is it because RealVNC is popular in Windows systems?

I could not connect from FC2 to a Windows box with RealVNC on it.

Timothy.

Steve Bergman wrote:

I'm interested to know what the reasons were for switching from TightVNC
to RealVNC.  I know that earlier versions of RedHat/Fedora Linux used
TightVNC, but now RealVNC seems to have replaced it.

Understand, I'm not in disagreement with the change, but as I am
evaluating both for a project, I'm curious.

-Steve Bergman

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Why the switch from TightVNC to RealVNC?
  - From: William Hooper

References:
- Why the switch from TightVNC to RealVNC?
  - From: Steve Bergman

Prev by Date: Re: Fedora Core 3 install hangs at /sbin/loader
Next by Date: Re: Connection to Webmin
Previous by thread: Why the switch from TightVNC to RealVNC?
Next by thread: Re: Why the switch from TightVNC to RealVNC?
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

[Index of Archives] [Current Fedora Users] [Fedora Desktop] [Fedora SELinux] [Yosemite News] [Yosemite Photos] [KDE Users] [Fedora Tools] [Fedora Docs]