On Sun, 2003-01-19 at 01:26, Carl wrote: > Well, they are different companies arent' they? There may be legal issues. > Also, isn't RealVNC open source? That's probably TightVNC's starting point.
What do you mean? Both pieces of software are licensed under the GPL, so they are legally compatible. Also, TightVNC isn't a company in the business sense of the word. > How does TightVNC compare to RealVNC when dialing up, say via a 56k line? I have no real numbers to compare (I assume that the only measurable quantity is the amount of data transferred with a particular encoding for a particular screen), but the subjective impression is that the 'tight' encoding performs 'better' over slow links than 'hextile', 'corre', 'rre', 'copyrect', and, obviously, 'raw', that are provided with RealVNC. 'tight' uses an optimized zlib compression scheme combined with jpeg compression to achieve this. Looking at the source of both RealVNC, and TightVNC, my initial impression is that it would not require much effort to include the 'tight' encoding in RealVNC. -- Fabian Fagerholm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> paniq.net _______________________________________________ VNC-List mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.realvnc.com/mailman/listinfo/vnc-list
