4 ms·
It's an ssh client. It is robust, easy to install and it works well. How much energy do you expect me to waste evaluating and choosing new ones when the one I
by Goladus 11y ago
It's an ssh client. It is robust, easy to install and it works well.
How much energy do you expect me to waste evaluating and choosing new ones when the one I have works just fine the way it is? I have better things to be doing.
- astrodust 11y agoThis is the poison in the open source world. If you have something that works "well enough" but never evolves, it holds everyone back. The barrier to entry is fairly high for an application like this, so I'm not saying this is an easy thing to fix, but it's worth fixing. Linux in particular is filled with "well enough" solutions that should be striving to be better. Although there's misfires when controversial things like systemd happen, there has been steady improvement in other areas. Imagine if Nginx had never happened, if NCSA httpd was "good enough"? The Windows user base deserves better than PuTTY.
- Aloha 11y agoBut whats wrong with PuTTY?, is it missing features?, I mean. like it has full SSH support, its easy to use, and has a non-quirky terminal emulator.. I guess it could have more terminal types, but there are closed source options for that, like Reflections.
- Macha 11y agoMostly it seems like overkill to run a ssh server + client to get a local terminal.