At $100 per year, .Mac is way too expensive for my iCal needs, and I wouldn't use any of its other features. But I'd pay, say, $39.95 for "netCal" if it worked over the Internet, and I'll bet I'm far from being the only person who would.
By the way, my current solution is to use Timbuktu. But that's for sharing the entire remote desktop, and the refresh rate is agonizing even with high-speed connections at both ends. I guess what I need is a form of Timbuktu that would work for a single application rather than for the entire desktop.
My immediate need is for that application to be iCal, but of course the ideal thing would be for it to work for any application I choose. For example, the wonderful application called Consistency (
www.sciral.com) would be another prime candidate for remote-ification.
Anyway, those are just my thoughts. You seem to have developed some skill with this cool interface-sharing technology that I've never seen used anywhere else, and assuming it can be made to work over the Internet rather than just locally, then I think you've only scratched the surface of its potential.
Tim