We would like configuration to be automatic and the price to be close to zero, however, that's not realistic. Everyone wants to join some kind of cloud service today. We have decided to keep our ERP software on our own servers. For users, it should be easier to create a template and duplicate users. We have done it in an old-fashioned way. 

It would be easier to set up, and upgrades should be easier.

View full review »

The current process I have to go through to get a Windows 11 VM up and running is difficult. Windows 10 worked a whole lot better than Windows 11.

View full review »

I think it does what it does well, so there is nothing that needs improvement. Microsoft Remote Desktop Services is very utilitarian and suits my use cases perfectly. View full review »

The only problem I see is that when I am connected, there is a certain lag because of the network.

View full review »

Microsoft improves its UI experience in every upgrade.

In the past, my company had faced some issues related to the stability of the product. The product's stability can be improved.

View full review »

We face frequent disconnections.

View full review »

We've had issues with security breaches. The main problem is that if we are using this with the individual computer and using a remote desktop, there are some loopholes there. When I implemented this on an individual computer within two or three days it got captured.

There is a problem with the printing and sharing of this program. There is a lot of customized software leaving the market due to this. If somebody wants to run a specific program with the specific settings, they don't want full access to the computer. Then there are some problems that have to be resolved.

We'd like to have an additional control panel available in order o more easily give resources to the computers. There are a lot of restrictions and having a program panel would make things easier. It would help us set up the right access and permissions.  

View full review »

Teams component can be a bit cumbersome to use. It takes some time to get it working as expected, but it's fine once you get used to it.

View full review »

The stability could be improved.

View full review »

The biggest reason we don't use the solution for our company's clients is the solution's prices. In our company, we do our own hosting through a hosting partner since this method offers a much cheaper price. Finding entry-level servers that are limited in the IOPS is frustrating. In our company, we feel quite restricted on the speed that we can get out of the entry-level type of service that we use, making it difficult to sell the solution, especially when clients compare the cloud solution to an on-premises solution.

View full review »

It's so insecure, and it's so limited. It became more limited since we cannot use the administration tools. Nothing is really working at this moment. I'm using it over a VPN and SSH too.

I've tried Microsoft's user assistance, and it's limited. 

The administrative functionality is not enough for me. I don't want the user to see what I am doing. I don't want to reveal any authorization keys or passwords. I want to be in the background, managing the desktop and using the Remote Desktop Viewer while handling best practices.

I'd like a chat function so we can talk right there in the app. It would be better than picking up the phone and guiding the users.

I'd like stronger security. 

I'd like to lock the session and take over a session so the user can just watch what I am doing and not interfere.

While the setup looks simple, in the end, it is pretty complex. 

A big upgrade would be if they stepped back from the TCP RDP port they are using and design it after an SSH tunneling and use that port since a tunnel is between two devices, and it is a very secure way to connect. The added benefit is you would also have the possibility to share local and remote resources. 

View full review »

We'd like to see more integration with other vendors. 

The solution could offer better, easier scalability. 

Technical support response times could be better. 

View full review »

The product can be improved by ensuring that people can access it from anywhere and be leveraged on any kind of device virtually. We are leveraging it on some laptops and PCs, but not on mobile devices. I would like to see Virtual Desktop leverage these devices in the future.

Furthermore, I would like to be able to leverage it on other operating systems. Currently, we only leverage it on Microsoft Windows. By being able to access other technologies, companies and users can use multiple technologies.

View full review »

The stability must be improved.

View full review »

There isn't any feature missing.

I don't like Windows too much. The whole idea of the remote desktop is nonsense in the Unix world.

The pricing could be better.

View full review »

When we update the environment, we face problems sometimes, and the users cannot use the system.

View full review »

The solution can improve the policies of the solution.

View full review »

If you are deploying it, as a VDI solution, then it is very limited.

The product is not very scalable. 

View full review »

I don't need any other new features. It works well as it is. 

We'd like them to continue to improve on security. 

View full review »

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. 

View full review »

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

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

View full review »

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."

View full review »

It's not as reliable a protocol as, for example, Citrix.

The training profiles could be better.

I'd like to have more granular remote profiles.

We'd like to see on-site multi-fact authentification.

View full review »

We'd like more granular security control of the desktop services. Right now, we have a third-party solution that does this. 

We need to control via group policies. We need to be able to implement these policies in a simpler way in order to control users in a more granular way.

View full review »

I don't really like the solution in general. It's like Microsoft made me use it. I didn't have a choice per se.

The price is too high.

I can use a VPN and get the same results while using an actual desktop.

I'd like to have more courses or training available. 

View full review »

What needs improvement in Microsoft Remote Desktop Services is the connection when I'm outside the network. It should be more accessible. For example, if I use a public network, I want to connect remotely more effortlessly, from my internal network, without much requirement.

I want to connect easily from an external network even when I'm not in my enterprise or company. It should be easy to connect or integrate Microsoft Teams, for example, with Microsoft Remote Desktop Services.

View full review »

For Microsoft, maybe bandwidth optimization is one of the areas that need improvement. They also need better support for video applications, like Teams.

View full review »

The solution isn't as good as the Citrix option.

View full review »

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.

View full review »

The solution is unsuitable for direct external internet connections. You must set up a VPN and password handling to use it.

View full review »

Users have reported that sometimes when we try to initialize an application, the session disappears one out of ten times. So, maybe it can be one of the areas of improvement. We are still investigating the issue, but we believe it might be due to a network or server issue.

Because this was the only issue I experienced was with the initialization of the session, which affected the stability of the service.

View full review »

The solution is not missing any features. 

It could offer better security for enterprises. They are not always on top of security.

View full review »

Microsoft Remote Desktop Services could improve by allowing the sharing of the office application. For example, the ability to replace a PC when something is wrong.

View full review »

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.

View full review »

Microsoft Remote Desktop Services could improve by having graphical acceleration.

View full review »

The solution is under the Microsoft infrastructure and therefore does not allow for service under other operating systems. We'd like, in the future, if it would work with Linux or Unix-based operating systems or even Mac.

View full review »

The solution should introduce a chat feature for end users.

View full review »

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. 

View full review »

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.

View full review »

Microsoft Remote Desktop Services could improve by having a better application for managing multiple sessions. There used to be one but they stopped supporting it.

View full review »

I've sometimes had trouble setting up an RDS connection if I want a specific user to be able to log in with their credentials and have the RDS element retain those settings so that the password isn't required each time. There can be issues with that. 

View full review »

From the perspective of an IT professional, Microsoft Remote Desktop is very easy to use. However, it could be made easier to use for the end user, especially when it comes to activating it.

Microsoft could also improve the sustainability of this product, especially in terms of account redundancy. They could also add something like a log to make more easy to use so that they can easily prevent some of the failures. I think Microsoft can do better.

View full review »

Microsoft Desktop Services is stable but it takes up a lot of resources in the CPU. It's a bit heavier than some solutions.

View full review »

We've had a few occasions when the application has crashed suddenly, possibly due to updates. Microsoft updates should not directly impact the application and rather than releasing post hotfixes, it would be better to carry out testing before releasing it to the environment. It's a challenge for us; the new application is upgraded, but there's an incompatibility. It should be the other way around - testing in the lab environment and then commercially released.

An additional feature we'd like to see would be cross-platform support. With more OSs in the market whether Microsoft, iMac or Android applications, it would be good to have a smooth transition between cross-platform support both in terms of operating system and in terms of devices. Moving from tabs to mobiles to desktops to laptops to notebooks - the transition between multiple OSs and multiple hardwares.

View full review »

Its look and feel could be updated.

In Azure Remote Desktop Services (RDS), which is a VDI solution, we would like to see linked clones. It is a Hyper-V solution, and it doesn't support linked clones and uses a lot of storage. That's why we don't use it. VMware has a similar solution that supports linked clones for the master image.

View full review »

It would be helpful if there was a feature that notifies you when the internet is down so you're not working for nothing, it should be something that pops right up where you can see it. The internet is always going to go down and the product seems to notice that it's down before my VPN notifies me that it's gone down. You're working and nothing's happening and it takes time to get the notification. 

For an additional feature, I'd like to see Remote Desktop specify which computer Zoom meetings will run on. I've joined a couple of sessions from home, and when I turn on my video, all you see is my empty desk chair at the office.

View full review »

Microsoft still has some really bad remote desktop appliances for Mac. This is really frustrating because if I'm on windows I can remove the Microsoft remote desktop applied for Windows, but I'm already using windows, I always have an option B. I can still plug directly with Microsoft management console from the windows station and still do something remotely. But on a Mac, I have to rely purely on the Microsoft Remote Desktop. 

If I need to pass second-factor authentication, not a one-time password thing, if I do a Microsoft remote desktop session, I have to reach the first server, which is my best one. From that server, you're actually going inside your protective network. Then on the second spot, you are not able to pass a YubiKey and go any farther. That creates the problem. We have had many support tickets.

View full review »

Microsoft Remote Desktop Services needs to improve its security. 

View full review »

There have been some network issues in the solution. So, when we used to connect it, the solution suddenly got disconnected. So the network part needs to be improved. Also, for a long duration, if we share Microsoft Remote Desktop Services, then network issues come up, so I suggest improvements in the aforementioned areas. Also, the pricing could be better.

View full review »

If anybody who's going to be using this, I’d warn that some of the dependencies that are very helpful when the window servers are running it would be best if they have network-level access enabled. It can speed up authentication. However, it really it also works well with TLS security as well as others on the certificate level. That said, I really don't know if I would start swinging in the dark after that.

Usually, during a privileged session, you don't want the privileged credential password being visible, nor maybe would you want keystrokes or screen scrapes to take place.

One of our first problems was the only time RDP ever gave me a problem was when an organization would build a new server. They would automatically build it. They would name it. They would put the connection settings on it. And then they would also put a certificate on it. Then the engineering team that ordered the server would then rename the server, which would nullify the certificate. That's the only time that RDP or remote desktop ever gave me a problem. And that was not the remote desktop's problem. It was a process flaw.

The only problems that you're going to have with the remote desktop are going to be firewall ports, security, and NLA, which is a net network level access control, or TLS transfer layer security or some other SSL-type of security. Those are the only times you get into any issues. And that's only due to the fact that the originating site is not compatible with the target site. However, that's rare. That said, even then, that's more on the rare side. I'm a PAM architect, a privileged access management architect. I usually knock down those problems before we get to them since I ran it all a hundred times.

View full review »

Microsoft Remote Desktop Services is only available for the professional version of the Windows operating system. This restricts a lot of users. The feature should be available for all versions.

View full review »

There are times I get disconnected from the service and when one or two attempts to establish a remote connection. Microsoft should show where the problem is, I have to find it by myself.

View full review »

The solution should have better security. 

It is overpriced.

View full review »

In a future release, they could improve by providing more advanced technology and better buffering for if the connection is degraded or lost. For example, if I am connected on my LAN or WAN, and there is any latency in the network while I am connected it will stay connected for one or two minutes. Without any buffering, the connection will be disconnected, and the work is lost.

View full review »

There could be some improvement in the integration of the solution.

View full review »

It could be made simpler from a management perspective.

It should be easier to set it up for desktop printing.

View full review »

The user interface needs improvement.

View full review »

While it's not expensive, the pricing could always be better.

I would like to see a web-based interface, instead of client installation to refresh the UI through HTML.

When comparing with other vendors offering applications not with a client module, but through the web through HTML, this should be the next step for Microsoft.

View full review »

I would like to be able to access the remote desktop using a web-based interface, rather than having to use the client.

View full review »

There are problems with using Microsoft Teams within a virtual desktop on a mobile device. Specifically, if you are using Teams and conferencing, then there is no microphone capability. To be clear, if you install Teams directly on your mobile device then it will work. However, if you use it as an application within the virtual desktop that is running on the mobile device, it does not work. This is something that needs to be fixed.

View full review »

The DB card needs improvement. I have a lot of experience with other competitors and Citrix is better than VMware and Microsoft. Citrix has more extensive features. 

View full review »

My customers are worried that the RDP protocol can be easily compromised and would like the option to use an alternative like Blast. The details of RDP are available to everyone and it has been used in industry for many years, so people know what points are vulnerable. If there were a patented protocol available as an option then people would be happy because they will be more assured of the security. Tweaking this would be really good in terms of security.

View full review »

Security in the connection between us and our clients' servers is something that can be improved.

View full review »

We are searching for a product with better remote access and remote sessions.

The user experience needs improvement.

View full review »

We need to extend over a potentially slower network, and we have heard that performance over slower networks is not as good. I understand that there are other products out there that work better over slower networks.

In the next release, I would like to see better performance over slower networks, and integration with Linux, but this is something that we're going to get out of Microsoft in terms of a unified solution. It rolls out to bigger issues and access management with being unified with Microsoft and Linux.

This hasn't quite come together, I would have to get other products outside of Windows to get this to work.

The unified solution may be a cross-platform solution, which would be great in the future.

View full review »

We find the services are not as transparent as we would like for our integration with Citrix.

View full review »

I think that the Single Sign-On (SSO) could be improved.

At release time, there was not a lot of information around. We invested some long hours researching. The documentation from Microsoft was difficult to find. Now there are plenty of step-by-step guides around.

View full review »

When I am connecting, I can do so from a Mac command line. However, to log in to a Windows server, I need to use this client. If Microsoft can find a way to remote into a Windows VN without using a client like this, that would be great.

I don't know how doable it is, or how easy it is to do, but maybe it's a limitation of the OS itself. Having a secondary app to log in to a remote VN is not ideal, but the app itself is very good.

View full review »

The speed should be a little more. When you're pitching from Mac to Windows, it takes a little more time than what is required. It can improve its speed. That's it. Everything else looks fine. I just started using it a year back, so that is what I can point out right now.

View full review »

There could be better options and it could be faster. I haven't had too many issues with it, but it's just a very basic program.

View full review »

Currently, installation of applications on an RDS farm must be performed manually on each server. This should be more controlled and automated.

Also, application sources are mixed on the file system and registry level. They should be in separate ‘containers’.

View full review »

Network bandwidth may limit a users experience with remote desktop services. If you don't have vpn/terminal access, you cannot use remote desktop. If network or server goes down, you cannot do any work. There may be some lag in running modern development tools. View full review »

When a change is made in Box, it affects all the services, which is annoying.

The performance of Remote Desktop Services could be better.

View full review »

I would like to see the hard drives work without locking up and integrate the local drives in the next release.

View full review »

Microsoft should be more compatible with other operating system. 

View full review »