That's one good thing about the 'Tight-Fork.. they seem to be continuing to strive to maintain the cross-platform nature.
AND not add a bunch of crapola and bloat it out.. ( but i wont start that back up. .ive said my peace a while go on that subject ) > > Message: 2 > Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2002 15:58:40 +0000 > From: Illtud Daniel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Organization: Llyfrgell Genedlaethol Cymru > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: VNC code forks... > > Jack Beglinger wrote: > > > > Why cann't the various folks building VNC functionality, merge > > > their efforts? > > > One reason comes to mind... File transfer or NOT. For me not, there are > > others ways. Also there may be other functions makes one more or less > > better. What is nice is having a choice. It would be great that common API > > is kept, so a UltraViewer could use a RealServer. That is for the three+ > > teams to work out, so all can inter-work. > > The impression I get is that whilst the originial VNC programmers > (now RealVNC) knew how to do cross-platform development. The > forks seem mostly to be by windows programmers who don't have > experience of maintaining a cross platform codebase and have only > produced windows versions. Of course, many of the improvements > in these forks are uniquely tied to windows (the video driver, > for example) and aren't suitable for other platforms. But in > doing this, I think they've broken the USP of VNC, ie the abstraction > away from the OS and the excellent cross-platform connectivity. > > Just my 2p, not a flame. > > -- > Illtud Daniel [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Uwch Ddadansoddwr Systemau Senior Systems Analyst > Llyfrgell Genedlaethol Cymru National Library of Wales > Yn siarad drosof fy hun, nid LlGC - Speaking personally, not for NLW > > --__--__-- _______________________________________________ VNC-List mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.realvnc.com/mailman/listinfo/vnc-list
