PAC Manager vs PuTTY
When comparing PAC Manager vs PuTTY, the Slant community recommends PuTTY for most people. In the question“What are the best SSH clients for UNIX-like systems?” PuTTY is ranked 3rd while PAC Manager is ranked 10th.
Specs
Ranked in these QuestionsQuestion Ranking
Pros
Pro PAC is pretty simple and does its job of collecting and managing a list of connections that can be quicly used to connect to some machine through SSH
Pro Free
Pro De facto standard client for SSH, Telnet and Rlogin on Windows
PuTTY is one of the oldest and most popular clients. It has earned the trust of a great number of users over a long period by being reliable, offering useful features and helpful support. It got into the 15 Essential Open Source Tools for Windows Admins list by InfoWorld.
Pro Can be used on any Windows computer, even without admin rights
Pro Source code available
Full source available. Compile and modify it yourself.
Pro Lightweight and portable
Doesn't require much resources (memory and hard-disk). Can even be run on a system by just downloading without install.
Cons
Con The developer officially abandoned the project
Early in 2017 the developer announced that he had no interest in continuing to develop it. Not a single line of code has been added or improved since then,
Con Heavily dependent on long-forgotten libraries
PAC Manager draws its underlying terminal functions from the Perl libraries written to interface with GNOME Terminal, circa...2006. The libraries have been untouched for at least five or six years, and just recently have begun to be removed from major distribution repositories like Debian and Ubuntu. It's a chore to get them installed and will only continue to get harder.
Con The tool has problems with blocking focus on its window, so sometimes it's hard to quickly switch to another one
Con Only one session per window
Cannot open a second session in the same window (you need multiple windows).
Con Can not save passwords
Anyway, you can use "PuTTYgen" to generate a key pair, then use "Pageant" to do a password-less SSH remote login.
Con Lacks features
It is JUST an SSH client. There are many other options with built in X-servers, Multitabbing, etc.
Con Ugly design, too simple
Looks very dated. Does the basic functions very well, but not much more.
Con No global settings
If you want to change a setting for all your connections, you'd have to do it individually.
Con Organizing sessions
Does not have features for organizing session connections (like folders). If you have 5-10 connections that's fine. But if there are 30-50 connections - that becomes a nightmare.
Con Tedious logging/tracing
Its tedious to set up logging and tracing (e.g. for serial connections).