Talk:TightVNC

Computing: Software / Free and open-source software

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Software.
	This article is supported by Free and open-source software (assessed as Low-importance).

Java Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Java, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Java on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.JavaWikipedia:WikiProject JavaTemplate:WikiProject JavaJava articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

RemoteVNC was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 23 September 2009 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into TightVNC. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here.

Text and/or other creative content from RemoteVNC was copied or moved into TightVNC with this edit. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists.

Claim of popularity[edit]

As much as I hate to do it, I have to remove the claim of "It is one of the more widely used of VNC implementations." I am unable to find any actual research on the matter of popularity between the two software, and my own limited research yields no means of determining actual usage data. Performing a Google search for both "TightVNC" and "RealVNC" (in quotes) yields greater results for RealVNC with 840,000 hits while TightVNC only 527,000 hits. Furthermore, a search for '*VNC "most popular"' and '*VNC "the most popular"' yield conflicting results but with nearly even hits for both, invalidating the usefulness of this search.

As of this writing, the only two popular VNC software are TightVNC and RealVNC, which makes the statement "one of the more" redundant as there are only two currently in any sort of demand. I suppose if you include the countless but useless and obsolete contenders, this would be an accurate statement, but it holds no encyclopedic value.

If it were possible to obtain some sort of client-info data off some vastly popular VNC servers, popularity data may be available, but no such technology exists thus making it impossible to support a claim of popularity. ~ Agvulpine (talk) 00:27, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I only put it in because the notability tag. It is quite ludicrous that one of the top 2 or 3 VNCs should be tagged as non-notable and I wanted to make it clear that this was one of the major ones. The annoying thing is I couldn't find a reference for it. What we need is just one good reference that can kill off the notability tag. The trouble is that I can't find a really good one. TightVNC is so popular that its blog coverage makes it hard to find RS coverage. --DanielRigal (talk) 11:16, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Portable versions[edit]

These are now on the same URL as the others. "Viewer executable, does not require installation" for the viewer, which is what most people think of as the "portable" part. The server/daemon can be run manually from the "Complete set of executables, no installer" download, if someone insists. ;) Fixing the dead link. 50.206.59.42 (talk) 20:10, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]