Remote Desktop Services vs. N-able Take Control

Remote Desktop Services provides access to work environments from any device. This allows us to ensure business continuity in case of disaster. It provides admins more control over access and security. Remote Desktop Services simplifies software updates and compliance management by reducing the need to act on end users devices.

It is phenomenal as a remote service tool, as well as a Teamviewer alternative for end users. But its per device interface is lacking, as well as how technicians are set-up. Once you learn the ins and outs its quite easy to use from both sides. However, it can be a little quirky when initially set-up.

Incentivized

• Relative ease of setup: in comparison to some of the other solutions on the market (Citrix, etc.), Remote Desktop Services is rather easy to set up and get configured in your environment.
• Feature set: Microsoft offers a good deal of the same features many competitors offer in the same space including a mobile app and the ability to have a "native" app feel for a remote application.
• Inexpensive Licensing: in comparison to other solutions on the market Remote Desktop Services is inexpensive.
• Move LOB applications closer to their server counterparts: this goes for all remote solutions, but if you have a line of business application that makes a great deal of calls across the network to your data center, your remote office users will likely benefit from the performance and stability side by moving those client side applications into the data center.

Incentivized

• Take Control is really good at accessing a device with no end-user involvement. The user doesn't have to click on permissions or visit a particular site. We simply can take control of their device from the RMM dashboard.
• If Microsoft issues a patch/update, I can schedule a release of a mass install to all client sites at the click of a mouse from within my office.

Incentivized

• Advanced configuration is required.
• Off-site access from a different network is very insecure unless a VPN can be used.
• It's complicated and relatively costly for multi-user environments, as each user or device requires a CAL on top of the server licensing.
• Incredibly complicated licensing strategy from Microsoft.

Incentivized

• Performance on low-end machines.
• Verbosity when changing stream quality.
• File manager needs improving, dragging files causes graphical issues.
• Connection time needs to be reduced.
• Ability to adjust re-connection time.
• Integration with more password-storage applications.
• Screen blanking is buggy in some instances and makes the session unusable.

Incentivized

Once set up it works well and is extremely easy for users. Getting it right can be difficult, it is easy to setup insecurely. Maintenance can be difficult with only a single broker and with manual switchover required for redundant gateways. Troubleshooting access issues can also be difficult

Incentivized

The interface needs a lot of updating. It's just too "busy."

Incentivized

There are some third party tools available that allow you to manage multiple connections.

Incentivized

As with any Microsoft Server product, support for Remote Desktop Services requires a paid support package. These are license-based and very costly, on top of the already costly product licensing. Microsoft's licensing is complicated to begin with, so setting up licensing alone essentially requires a licensing expert's counsel. There is community documentation and support available on Microsoft websites, as well as community websites.

Incentivized

We used RDS on-site primarily because of how easy it is for users to transition from their own desktop to a remote desktop. However, from off-site, there are VPN and other security considerations to take into account, and the process gets a little more complex. In this situation, especially if you're trying to support a user who is outside the local network, it can be easier to use something like Chrome Remote Desktop or TeamViewer. However, the Windows functionality of RDS is totally unmatched.

Incentivized

Bad experiences with ConnectWise platforms in general ruled it out for us at this point in time. To be fair this was not really ConnectWise's fault more the team that set things up poorly leading to significant issues across the system. TeamViewer had long been our go to, but pricing increases, the inclusion of ads (in a not inexpensive product) is infuriating for some. and ongoing poor business behavior reports in the industry lead us to look elsewhere

• Remote Desktop Services has had a major positive ROI impact at our firm. There were a number of times when our staff was traveling abroad to business meetings with a laptop that had missing presentations. But once they had internet access, a Remote Desktop Services connection is established, and presentation data can now be shown directly from their laptops as if theyr'e sitting in our office.
• Remote Desktop Services has made it possible for Mac staff users to use their computing devices to access our network system to run Windows applications and access all our network data.
• Remote Desktop Services has made it possible for our staff to successfully work remotely from outside the office. There were many occasions when emergencies came up which prevented staff from coming into the office to work. But as long as they have a computer with an internet connection, they used Remote Desktop Services to connect to our terminal server and successfully ran the programs to modify data files on the network without losing a beat.

Incentivized

• We we're able to bundle Take Control into our RMM pricing removing the need to pay for a separate system and maintain its intergration
• Remote access is only a click away saving our techs time
• Reliable connection mean issues are resolved without having to 'fix' the remote access first