Microsoft Remote Desktop Services Reviews

We use it to connect to the legacy system.

It is still in the early stages, and the features are purely for connectivity.

There is a limitation on the number of concurrent users. The limitation is 20, and you have to spin up more than one server, which is not needed at this stage because of customers. So they reduced it to 12 active users. So if you want to deploy more than 12, you should assess other solutions.

We have been using this solution for three months, and it is the latest version. It is deployed on cloud.

We had issues with stability in the beginning, but it is good now. The stability depends on connectivity in terms of the latency of the internet link.

We have not tried to scale it. We have 40 users using this solution.

I rate the technical support a six out of ten. It took them a while to understand the technology.

We chose this solution because it's a Microsoft Cloud and end-to-end all solution, Cloud 365. In addition, it's all Microsoft, so it made sense to stay with the same VDI solution.

The initial setup was straightforward. The deployment was done with BCX, and it took one week.

The licensing came with the product, and the solution had no additional costs.

I rate this solution an eight out of ten. Regarding advice, it depends on the requirements and what you need. In this case, it's just for one legacy system. So if you assess more functionality and scalability, we would look at different products because the customers would be prepared to pay for those products.

I use RDS to connect our servers.

The most valuable part of RDS is that it allows you to work from any location and check the server through a VPN connection.

Users have to re-enter their ID and password every time they log on, which is tedious and repetitive. It would be better if the system could save users' passwords between sessions.

I've been using RDS for around ten years.

The cloud version's scalability is better than on-prem.

Microsoft's technical support is helpful, but its speed could be better.

The initial setup is very simple.

I would rate RDS eight out of ten.

The most valuable aspect is it is handy. We just start up the servers, and we can call the remote desktop, and it's connected. And that's it.

The product is stable.

It is easy to set up.

The solution is highly scalable. 

The performance depends on connectivity. The refreshing screen rate is based on the internet and the bandwidth. It can therefore be unstable. 

It would be nice if they had a portable version. This would make it much better. Sometimes we cannot install it on some machines. We just want to use it once and don't need to actually install it anyway, yet we can't. 

I've been using the solution for 20 years. 

The stability depends on the connectivity. If there is terrible connectivity, it will be unstable. In general, if the connectivity is there, I would rate it four out of five in terms of stability.

The scalability has been very good. 

We have about 20 licensed users on the solution right now. 

I've never called technical support. I can't speak to how helpful or responsive they are. 

I'm familiar with TeamViewer and Desktop Anywhere. They are good, however, we are concerned they have issues surrounding security. That's why we prefer this product.

The initial setup is simple. It's not a complex process. 

The solution comes in a bundle, which offers a cost-savings to customers. 

I'm not sure of the exact price. I don't deal with that directly.

I'm just an end-user.

It's on-prem and we have a server or a cluster to form a group of servers to provide. We are our access from other countries as we have some colleagues working in Britain.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. 

The solution is primarily for remote desktop services. It's used to start up a desktop service, and we can use a password and a user name to work remotely on other servers.

The product is very easy to use. 

The solution's implementation process is simple. 

It's pretty stable. 

It can scale well.

I can't think of an area that is lacking currently.

We had some instability during the implementation process. This has since been resolved. 

We've used the product for two years now. It was implemented at the beginning of COVID.

The stability is okay in most cases. Sometimes, especially in the beginning, we had some problems. However, that was due to the implementation of this solution. At this moment it's very stable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

The scalability, as far as I know, is not an issue. We moved all employees to this solution. We started with a few, and now almost a thousand colleagues are using this solution. Therefore, for us, in our experience, the solution looks very good if you need to scale.

I've never been in contact with Microsoft technical support. 

Before this solution, we used Citrix.

The solution has a straightforward setup. It's not very complex at all. 

Its deployment took a few weeks. 

The organization, during the start of COVID, had a lot of colleagues started working from home, and it seemed that the Citrix solution was not capable of doing that, so the ICT offices switched to Remote Desktop Services to accommodate people working from home. Our strategy was to have that capability.

The deployment and maintenance are handled by a third party. They aren't necessarily dedicated, however, they are they if something needs to be done. 

We had a third-party integrator that assisted with the implementation. 

I haven't witnessed an ROI. 

We use the solution. We're customers.

We're using the latest version of the solution. 

We use Microsoft Authenticator to log on, which is straightforward. 

I would recommend the solution to others. I suggest they just go for it. It's a very good solution. 

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

We use it in our bank.

We have some servers, and more than two users go remotely with them. We prepare with the Microsoft engineer servers that take them and the license for the users when they need them.

It has generally improved how our organization functions.

The solution is now stable.

The initial setup is simple. It's quick to deploy.

It works well and does what we need it to do.

Sometimes the server stops working, and we don’t know why. Occasionally we’ll get a message to the effect of "There is no remote license."

I’ve been using the solution for about one year.

While we had a problem before, now everything is stable. It’s reliable now. We’ve dealt with our issues and no longer have troubles.

I can’t speak to the scalability. I’ve never attempted to scale. That’s handled by someone else in the company.

Right now, we have 50 licenses available to us. We use the solution quite extensively.

I’ve never dealt with technical support for issues related to the stability problem. I can’t speak to how helpful or responsive they would be. Other team members deal with them. We do have a support contract with Microsoft.

I have dealt with them on Teams on Active Directory and found them to be helpful. I found their help to be excellent.

We already had a license with Microsoft, and therefore, it was natural to use this product as well.

It’s not difficult to set up. It’s pretty straightforward.

The deployment is pretty fast. It only takes about an hour and a half. We only needed to have three people handle the deployment and maintenance.

An engineer worked with us to set up the servers. We have machines joining the domain, and we have workgroup machines.

We handled everything in-house. We didn’t need the help of consultants.

I’m not sure if we have seen an ROI.

I cannot speak to how much the solution costs. My understanding is that it is moderately priced in that it is not cheap or expensive. We ended up getting it when we renewed our license. It’s an extra feature with the broader Microsoft license.

I’m not sure which version of the solution we’re using.

I’d recommend the solution to others. It’s solved problems for us and worked well.

I’d rate the solution nine out of ten.

We have a partnership with Microsoft.

Microsoft Remote Desktop Services could improve by having graphical acceleration.

I have been using Microsoft Remote Desktop Services for approximately two years.

Microsoft Remote Desktop Services is stable and reliable.

The scalability of Microsoft Remote Desktop Services is good.

I have not needed to call the support from Microsoft Remote Desktop Services because the solution is easy to use.

I have previously used other solutions, such as Citrix and VMware. Citrix is the best choice of the ones I have tried.

The initial setup of Microsoft Remote Desktop Services is very easy.

The price of Microsoft Remote Desktop Services is reasonable.

I rate Microsoft Remote Desktop Services an eight out of ten.

The solution helps users to access desktops remotely.

The solution performs well and is easy to use.

Microsoft's desktop versions have a limit of only one concurrent session. It needs to be improved. Also, they should enhance the solution's user interface. It could be more intuitive compared to TeamViewer and AnyDesk. 

I rate the solution's stability as a nine.

We have used VNC Viewer, UltraVNC, and TeamViewer before.

The solution is easy to install.

The solution's license is affordable.

I recommend the solution to others and rate it as a nine.

We predominantly use Microsoft Remote Desktop Services to access our server. Our team works remotely and needs to log in to perform tasks such as billing. We had two options: either use our existing internal infrastructure or move to the cloud. However, we also required remote printing services so that team members could print from their local desktops. To achieve this, we implemented terminal printing services, VPN, and remote desktop. The purpose was to enable both on-site and remote team members to perform billing tasks, invoicing, and tracking truck movement.

Microsoft Remote Desktop Services meets all our requirements.

We encounter challenges with portability, especially for users of iOS devices. It becomes particularly difficult for us to manage if both ends have iOS devices, whereas having the same infrastructure with Microsoft Windows environments on both ends works seamlessly. The licensing of iOS presents problems for third-party integration and has room for improvement.

I have been using the solution for eight months.

I give the stability a nine out of ten.

I give the scalability an eight out of ten.

The initial setup is straightforward. We activated the solution smoothly and completed the deployment within a day. Beforehand, the distributor's tech team came to discuss our network and gain an understanding of everything. It took them a day to configure the solution. Although everything went smoothly thereafter, we encountered some initial challenges. Specifically, we faced issues connecting to the local and remote printers, as printing services were not functioning properly. To address this, we worked on it for a day and met our requirements within two to three days. It's worth noting that the solution isn't entirely plug-and-play, and there are challenges that require mitigation.

The implementation was completed in-house with the help of the distributor techs.

The cost is fair.

I give the solution a ten out of ten.

We have around 70 people using the solution within our Accounting, Billing, and Sales departments.

I recommend Microsoft Remote Desktop Services to others.