Talk:Comparison of remote desktop software

What is RFB memory in fire systems

Deleting table rows

Stop deleting table rows in a biased manner! An editor just deleted some rows which did not have Wikipedia articles about them, but did not delete all of the table rows satisfying that criterion. That is biased.

In any case, I don't think that we should only be comparing remote desktop software products that have individual Wikipedia articles. That would be unhelpful. Just because a product is little-known, doesn't mean it can't be best-in-class, hypothetically speaking. —greenrd 12:01, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Encryption format/type

I've had some conversations on the security of remote access protocols, particularly VNC vs RDP. I would have liked to refer to this article as a guide, but all I found was 'Yes/No'. Will there be signifigant opposition from the community if I renamed the 'Encryption' Contents from Yes/No to "None, '128-bit RC4 w/ TLS' for RDP, '128-bit RC4/AES/AESV2 with plugin' for UltraVNC, and so on? Sartan 23:55, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Instead of the reactionary approach, I've gone ahead and added this ;) 'References are' the pages themselves. Sartan 00:18, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

XDMCP

Does XDMCP really belong in this list? It's real purpose if for dumb terminals and created before the days of current remote desktop applications. --Skunark 04:23, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Probably not, it was an attempt at populating the list content. Feel free to remove. RFB/X11 doesn't really "Fit" here, does it? Sartan 03:02, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

multiple sessions

They all pretty much do multiple sessions. Would it be better to list which apps can share desktops, require full desktop or just an application? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Skunark (talk • contribs) 05:05, 12 May 2007 (UTC).

I was almost thinking of setting this up to specify application sharing (RDP, ICA) rather than 'multiple sessions' because this is vague and undefined. Let's fix this! ;) Sartan 03:01, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Encryption Misleading

Coloring the encryption column red if not on is NOT a problem if using ssh. Indeed if ssh is being used then likely you would want to turn encryption off so that unnecessary work is not done. The only time that encryption would be useful if it were greater than ssh or done faster. 128-bit is not strong encryption, perhaps a red mark should be made of these! 4000-bit is strong. 2000-bit is good? Perhaps this could be expanded by someone (no visits from NSA please). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 220.240.85.65 (talk) 17:19, 14 May 2007 (UTC).

I suggest we rename the column to 'Native Encryption', because you can encrypt pretty much anything you want if you set up a proper SSH tunnel. Whether this is done, or a best practice or not, is really up to the administrator although the application cannot enforce it. Sartan 03:03, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Port knocking

I think port knocking is a useful feature and should be listed in the table. Does anyone agree? I only know of one VNC that implements it, though. --AndrewZ 15 May 2007 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.59.193.95 (talk) 19:10, 15 May 2007 (UTC).

What about TurboVNC

Any chance of getting TurboVNC included here?

• Ditto for Remote Administrator... This article needs to be expanded. -AlexLibman 19:16, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Recommend splitting the table in to three: client, server, java/browser viewer

I think this table would be better viewed if it was split into 3. Also, most if not all of the remote desktop software supports multiple sessions. All of the VNC server and clients do. Also, you might want to list Unix as the other OS candidate, they were listed there at one time. --Skunark 03:45, 31 May 2007 (UTC)