4 ms·
Having an HTML5 client built-in doesn't mean that it's "clientless" but it's still impressive. MIT license doesn't hurt, too.
by egeozcan 12y ago
Having an HTML5 client built-in doesn't mean that it's "clientless" but it's still impressive. MIT license doesn't hurt, too.
- jitl 12y agoIt's "clientless" as in you don't have to install any software on the machine you want to connect from. No need to fiddle with RDP software on your parent's computers, or worry about access control restrictions from a locked-down corporate network. As far as permissions go, if you can browse the internet on a computer, you can remote control your servers with Guacamole.
- dshankar 12y agoWhile purely a semantic argument, perhaps "plugin-free" is a more meaningful description than "clientless"
- gioele 12y ago> It's "clientless" as in you don't have to install any software on the machine you want to connect from. Except a browser compatible with HTML5-august-2014-revision. Believe it or not, there are many places stuck in pre-HTML5 times (hotel computers, for example). If it could stream GIFs and accept clicks with server-side image maps, then it would be compatible with every desktop graphical browser in existence (Opera Mini and text browser would still be not enough).
- Eiriksmal 12y ago> If it could stream GIFs and accept clicks with server-side image maps, then it would be compatible with every desktop graphical browser in existence I can't decide if that's the most brilliant idea I've ever heard or the most terrifying. Probably both.
- tekacs 12y agoLogMeIn did this (albeit with refreshing static images for control, IIRC) as a supported in-browser fallback client for almost a decade. It was horrifically painful, but usable in a pinch.
- drunkcatsdgaf 12y agoYou could always install a older version, this has been around for roughly 2 years now.