Share your experience using VMware Wanova Mirage [EOL]

My main use case for Microsoft Remote Desktop Services is to log in remotely into a different environment. I have an appliance that we can log in to and be able to get onto different servers and navigate, and we get there through Microsoft Remote Desktop Services.

The best features Microsoft Remote Desktop Services offers include being able to log in and being able to control other machines.

Controlling other machines helps me in my role as it improves our workflow, allowing us to get in rapidly and do our work.

Microsoft Remote Desktop Services has positively impacted my organization by allowing us to remote in rapidly and securely. The secure aspect of Microsoft Remote Desktop Services helps my team stay secure by supporting MFA, which allows us to secure who logs in.

Microsoft Remote Desktop Services helps my team collaborate and work together by allowing us to put everything in one ecosystem with the integration, and it works very well with Windows Server, Active Directory, and Azure.

Microsoft Remote Desktop Services handles updates and maintenance in my environment easily, as it is easy to manage. Microsoft Remote Desktop Services performs very well in terms of reliability and uptime for my organization, and I appreciate this feature.

Microsoft Remote Desktop Services integrates with my existing security tools and policies and is compatible with our security stack, as we are a Microsoft shop, and it works well with us.

When multiple users are logged in at the same time, we have not noticed any issues with Microsoft Remote Desktop Services. The user experience for my team with Microsoft Remote Desktop Services is intuitive and easy to use.

Microsoft Remote Desktop Services can be improved by addressing the single session limitations and also clarifying the licensing, which can be confusing.

I have been using Microsoft Remote Desktop Services for five years.

Microsoft Remote Desktop Services is stable.

The scalability of Microsoft Remote Desktop Services performs well.

Microsoft has good customer support. I would rate the customer support of Microsoft Remote Desktop Services a 10.

Positive

I cannot share any metrics on return on investment, but I appreciate the features and the use of it.

My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing for Microsoft Remote Desktop Services was that the licensing was acceptable, but I think the cost was fair.

Before choosing Microsoft Remote Desktop Services, I evaluated other options, particularly Citrix.

Microsoft Remote Desktop Services is a good product and I recommend using it. I would rate this product a 9 out of 10.

With Rocket Exceed TurboX, I found use cases valuable for scenarios where you have low bandwidth while working remotely. For example, if you want to access a server for CAD design—whether it is ASIC design or 3D design—you need a tailored solution. Normal open-source solutions like VNC do not work well for this purpose. Rocket Exceed TurboX is good for low bandwidth, multi-license, and multi-user solutions.

The best features of Rocket Exceed TurboX are that it works reasonably well and is easy to set up. As the admin, I set up the server and tested it with different bandwidths. The solution performs better than VNC, though there is still lag in the one Mbps to four Mbps range. Rocket Exceed TurboX automatically adjusts the resolution according to the program that is running, which is their intellectual property. This intelligent adjustment is a significant advantage compared to VNC, where I had to set it to the lowest setting with poor resolution to achieve acceptable performance.

The drawbacks of Rocket Exceed TurboX include lagging and cost. However, it does improve performance compared to open-source solutions, and the pricing is reasonable, especially for a large number of clients. Overall, it is good and definitely worth trying.

I used Rocket Exceed TurboX with a free trial lasting almost six months.

The data access speed of Rocket Exceed TurboX helped somewhat. It is better than the original solution I was using, though it has its drawbacks. During my six-month trial, I attempted to use it to the best of my ability to test different cases. It seems to work better than the original solution, but it still does not meet the standards I wanted.

The support for Rocket Exceed TurboX was very good. Their support and documentation were excellent, so I was able to do everything myself.

Positive

I was able to customize some configurations with Rocket Exceed TurboX to a degree. The customization options are high-level settings. For example, the adaptive configuration setting automatically changes the configuration depending on network speed, so I did not have to manually change anything.

The cost was a little more than I wanted. There are other ways to achieve remote access, such as using an Amazon AWS server running Linux. That option is easier for low bandwidth because you have direct access to the server from anywhere. The AWS approach picks the closest server and provides redundancy, but Rocket Exceed TurboX is a bit more expensive.

AWS is faster because when you use a machine on the cloud, you can connect from anywhere at any speed.

Rocket Exceed TurboX is purely a remote access solution and does not directly correspond to data analysis. There are probably metrics that OpenText collects for their software, such as how they patch things if something goes down, but I do not know what those are. There might be some debug files that they collect as well, but I am not aware of what those are. I would rate this product an eight out of ten.