TermLink vs Claude Code Remote Control

That last one is worth being blunt about, because it gets repeated wrongly. Remote Control has a server mode that runs concurrent sessions, with a default capacity of 32 and an option to give each session its own git worktree. If you have read somewhere that it is one repo or one session at a time, that is not what their documentation says.

So the choice is not about capacity. It is about what you get a window onto.

The cleanest way to hold the difference is to ask what one session is. In Remote Control a session is a conversation, and your machine is reached through it — which is why command output arrives there as something Claude ran for you, formatted and copyable. In TermLink a session is a terminal sitting in one directory, and an agent is one of the things you can start in it. Neither unit is the better one. They are different units, and the one you want depends on whether you think in conversations or in working directories.

One practical gate worth knowing before you weigh anything else: Remote Control signs in through claude.ai, and API keys are not supported, so a setup that authenticates with a key or routes through a gateway cannot use it. If the agent you most want to reach is not Claude Code, that decides it for you.

TermLink routes terminal bytes through the relay in memory and does not write them to disk. Nothing about your session output is kept on our side. That is a trade rather than a win: it is also why TermLink hands you the screen repainted by your own machine instead of a conversation history it could replay.

What the relay can and cannot see is set out on the security page, including the parts that are not encrypted end to end.

Put those two numbers side by side and you are comparing different things, so it is worth saying what each one counts. Theirs counts conversations a server will hold at once. Ours counts terminals held open at once, each one standing in a directory. A number is not the reason to pick either.

The difference that does decide it is what the list is made of. TermLink lists machines and the terminals on them, and each card carries that session's latest line — whether that line came from Claude Code, from Codex CLI, from a test run, or from a deploy that failed while you were out. Nothing in the list has to be an agent.

What that looks like day to day is on managing multiple Claude Code sessions.

Other agents. Codex CLI, Cursor Agent and GitHub Copilot CLI are on by default and land in the same list, each with its own approval setting. Claude Code is the one we support most closely. See a session manager for AI coding agents.

A full shell. The session is the terminal your agent lives in, so the same window runs your test suite, tails a log, or checks out a branch. Nothing about it is agent-shaped, and a session that is not running an agent at all works the same.

Unattended approvals. A per-session setting — a three-level Auto-approve on an agent session, an Auto-Yes switch on a terminal session — so a long run does not sit blocked while you are away. Neither one answers a question the agent is asking you. How it works, and when to leave it off.

In practice people settle on one out of habit rather than necessity. Worth asking which one actually matches how your week goes.

If you are weighing something else entirely — running the agent on hosted infrastructure instead of your own machine — that is a different question, and it is on TermLink vs Omni by xpander.

This is also why it works on a laptop that moves between networks — there is no address for anyone to reach. More in how a remote terminal works without SSH or a VPN.

The cap counts sessions, not viewers: you can watch them from as many browsers and phones as you like.