On 6/29/06, Thor (Hammer of God) <thor (at) hammerofgod (dot) com [email concealed]> wrote:
>
> When I set up "apple remote desktop" for access, I can not connect to it
> over 5900. I've allowed it in the firewall, and even turned the firewall
> off to test. When I try to connect either via UltraVNC or RealVNC from my
> XP box, the connection is terminated. A network trace of the communications
> (UltraVNC in this case) shows an "Incompatible Version" message.

I had the same problem connecting to ARD's VNC service via RealVNC, so
I switched to ThightVNC client which works fine.

Another problem, with TightVNC or, maybe, with ARD's VNC Service, shows up:
I can't modify the colour depth option, reducing it to 256 for example.

OsxVNC works much better the ARD...
RDP works much much better than the two above... even with full colours.

> The question is, should I even worry about ARD since I'm successfully
> running OSXvnc? What are the pros and cons? The OSXvnc connection is
> encrypted, and it seems to support multiple simultaneous users. However, it
> seems a bit "slow." Not in a "sluggish" way, but there just seems to be an
> overall "funk" about it. I'm used to the "snap" of RDP for TS/Remote Desktop
> on MSFT...

I use ARD now - used OsxVNC before - because it's a single and
standalone product offering remote control capabilities. Simply put, I
didn't want to use ARD _and_ OsxVNC :-)

My only advice is to set up an ssh tunnel to encrypt _all_ VNC network
traffic, either using ARD or OsxVNC.

SSH Tuunel sw:
Mac: SSH Tunnel Manager
WIN: Bitvise Tunnelier

Cheers,
Alex
--
Alessandro Pupin
alex.pupin (at) mac (dot) com [email concealed]
alex.pupin (at) gmail (dot) com [email concealed]

[ reply ]