Coming October 25: PeerSpot Awards will be announced! Learn more
Buyer's Guide
Remote Access
September 2022
Get our free report covering TeamViewer, Microsoft, Citrix, and other competitors of TeamViewer. Updated: September 2022.
635,162 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Read reviews of TeamViewer alternatives and competitors

Steve Schick - PeerSpot reviewer
Technology and Logistics Director at a media company with 501-1,000 employees
Real User
Multifeatured remote access software which offers security, stability, and easy scalability
Pros and Cons
  • "Offers more security than TeamViewer, Google Remote Desktop, and Zoom. It's a stable, feature-rich solution that's easy to set up and easy to scale."

    What is our primary use case?

    We use ConnectWise Control as a great remote access tool.

    How has it helped my organization?

    The primary support or the remote access support is really what we use ConnectWise Control for, but that's just the tip of the iceberg.

    Even people outside of the organization would benefit from this. We do push out the agents, but if somebody, for whatever reason, like our board of trustees, don't have the agent on their computer, we can create a support session so they can just join via a web browser and we can support them in the same manner. It's very handy. It's very beneficial.

    It also has the ability to have online meetings, like a WebEx scenario.

    I haven't really played around with it too much, but what they refer to, what ConnectWise calls the unattended access, I would say is easily 80% to 90% of what we've used here and in previous lives, so it's really great.

    This solution is very feature rich. It has a Wake-on-LAN ability.

    You can also run commands against the machines, e.g. for old guys like me who prefer that instead of the fancy GUIs. It's similar to a DOS window where you can run different types of commands against it.

    It does come in handy if you just want to do something in the background, e.g. schedule reboots, and you don't want to become too invasive to what the user's doing. Especially in our situation, a lot of times they're teaching a class and it's like: "Ugh. We don't want this to pop up." They've got their laptops connected to an interactive display most of the time, so they don't need to see what's going on in the background. It's pretty awesome.

    I also like the fact that it does do an audit, so you can see who's connected to the machine. If somebody, every once in a while, and this isn't exclusive to ConnectWise Control, we'll get a call saying: "Hey. Something's not right with my machine. The mouse is moving on its own...", and we take a look, and sure enough: One of the support agents has taken control.

    That's the draw back of any type of unattended access: They can just do that, so I've always put in a policy saying: "Hey. You need to make sure that you have the user's permission before connecting to their machine just so: A. You don't freak them out, and B. They know what you're doing." The audit trail on that is very good. It can show that.

    The other nice thing is it has a two-way instant messaging feature built in, so if you're trying to communicate with somebody who maybe doesn't have a phone or whatever the case may be, you can type messages back and forth. This is a nice feature too.

    The ability to block guest input is really good. If you are connected to somebody's machine and you're working on it, e.g. you're just on your screen Googling something and then they take the mouse and start moving it around, and you'll have to tell them: "No, don't do that. Don't close that."

    You can block them from having control, so you're not fighting over control, e.g. mouse control. Another example is if you have the need to enter a password with additional access, e.g. an admin password, you can blank out their monitor so they can't see what you're typing. That's very, very handy because you don't want the end user to be able to get that password, and if you mistakenly type it in the username field, it will be in plain text. It'll be there until you do your password change.

    What is most valuable?

    We actually have this solution set up quite slick where there's different modes for it. We use what they call unattended mode, so the way it works is it pushes out the agent to all the Windows-based machines. They're in a "by school" type of thing in our example, but you can do it by department or groups, or by custom groups. We have full control over the machines. You can do whatever you need to do as if the machine was right in front of you.

    One of the other features that is very, very strong in ConnectWise Control is the shared toolbox. It gives you the ability to have certain applications that you can't push out to machines for some reason, e.g. you can't use a GPO (Group Policy Object) because they're not on the domain, or because they're just totally remote. You can push out a portable support tool through the toolbox, for example: if you want to do a disk cleanup because you're getting a low disk space warning. There's hundreds of examples I could share with you. The shared toolbox feature of this solution is very popular.

    I've been here two and a half years now, and previously I was in a managed service provider. We used this solution per instance, per client and it's just been enormously powerful for that. You can set up the remote access and get pretty granular as far as permissions go, but it's just been a fantastic tool and I would highly recommend it to anybody.

    When I first looked at this solution, one of the things that I thought was incredible that they've given a lot of thought to, is the ability to reboot machines and not lose connection to it. That's something that some of the competitor products could not do: When you rebooted the machine, you literally lost sight of it. If it came back up, great. If not, then you'll be in a bad situation.

    ConnectWise Control has two options for that. You can reboot to normal mode or to safe mode, which has been pretty handy from time to time when you need to get into safe mode in case there's a potentially corrupt operating system. I use that not very often, but just knowing that it's there when it is needed has been really good.

    I did mention the toolbox which is really good.

    The granular groups is also good because for a managed service provider, to be able to just really get that down, e.g. you don't want to give full access to everybody, it's just fantastic with that.

    What needs improvement?

    From my standpoint, I'm quite happy with this solution. There's nothing more I would want to do with it for improvement.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I've been using it for 10 years now.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    I find ConnectWise Control to be a stable product. It's very, very rare for bugs, glitches, or performance issues to occur. No software is absolutely perfect, but every once in a while you'll just see something, e.g. the service is unavailable. This happens just once a year, and it's very, very short lived. It's just a matter of getting coffee, coming back, then it's fine.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    This solution is absolutely easy to scale.

    We had almost 6,000 endpoints in one of the MSPs that I worked for, and I didn't find any issues with that at all.

    Right now, we're hovering around 1,000 endpoints, with no issues.

    In the larger MSP that I worked for, my remote team consisted of 20+ individuals, and this product went through the paces, but I've never heard anybody say, "Hey, you know what? This is just too slow. I'm going to wait until somebody's off to continue because it's unusable."

    How are customer service and support?

    The only time I've ever had to contact tech support is to purchase additional licenses, and they would just send me over to the sales department.

    Now I don't even have to do that because they have a self-serve portal. If you do have to contact support, you can do that right on the main screen.

    If I remember correctly, they have a chat feature too, so it's not like you have to wait in queue for an agent. There's somebody there to at least chat with. With a company the size of ConnectWise, I would expect them to have very strong support.

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    There was a time when we were using Google Remote Desktop. There were a lot of the things that I didn't like about it, particularly the security it provides.

    ConnectWise is a lot more secure than TeamViewer, Zoom, and Google Remote Desktop, especially in schools which has been a known area where malicious activity has occurred. I just don't hear the same thing, nor have I experienced the same security risks from ConnectWise Control.

    There were definitely features I found in this solution, e.g. the ability to reboot in safe mode which aren't available in the previous tools that we had in place.

    ScreenConnect or ConnectWise Control as it's known today has been my go-to solution for the last decade. The other products we used previously had a lot of performance issues.

    Talking about VNCs, they were not as usable at times. The VNC was such a poor technology. We tried different products, so it's not just one product that was an issue.

    TeamViewer was a solution I found really, really heavy. It needed a lot of resources. The juice just wasn't worth the squeeze. It was a lot of work and we really didn't benefit from it.

    When I was introduced to ScreenConnect or ConnectWise Control, it was almost too good to be true. We did a proof of concept for six to eight weeks on it, then we started switching over to it as our primary tool. Nothing was preventing us from doing that, not even the price, because it was totally reasonable, totally doable, and the rest was history. We never looked back.

    We also used LogMeIn in the past. It was a scaled down version, or it could have been another acquisition called join.me. There was some acquisition there, but I can't keep track of all these acquisitions. They were okay, but not feature-rich. LogMeIn and join.me suddenly had significant price increases, so they were almost pricing themselves off the market.

    How was the initial setup?

    The initial setup is easy. With no exaggeration, from the time you sign up for your free trial to when your instance is created, it takes less than 10 minutes per person.

    It's just really a matter of how granular you want it to be, how many groups you have, and your group structure. I have fairly bad OCD, so I have subgroups on top of groups.

    If you just want to use it out of the box and deploy an agent, you'll have the machines checking in easily within 10 minutes, then you can just sort them from there if you want to.

    It is as simple as can be.

    What was our ROI?

    We saw a return on investment from using this solution.

    It's just really difficult to put a price tag on ROI because often times we deal with non-technical individuals who just get very frustrated and they can't exactly express themselves very well with what's happening. We get this feedback from them which is not uncommon: "It just doesn't work. I don't know what's going on. There's this message here."

    We help them with their concern and say: "Hey, can we just connect to your machine and take a look at what's going on, because it's a lot easier to visualize?" Just by not having to drive out to rural Alberta where there is a lot of snow, and we're up to about three feet of snow this year. It's not exactly easy to drive anywhere, so the ROI on this is easily less than a day, and that's really not an exaggeration. It's totally worth the money.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    ConnectWise Control is not an overly expensive tool.

    When I first bought it 10 years ago, I paid about $4,000 for a one-time license for unlimited connections. The price has gone up over the years, but the current pricing only costs us $35 a year for each license. We're a small team, so we're on a very, very basic plan and we've only got four licenses. Pricing for this solution is reasonable.

    I found the invoice for this solution and it's $840, so the $35 was actually per month. It's the per month charge. It's reasonable. If somebody uses it once a month, it more than paid for what we would've had to do for going out. Literally, the team's in there all the time. Not a day goes by that everybody hasn't used it.

    I don't recall any additional fees on top of the licensing cost. There are different licensing models and you get more features depending on the model.

    Because of our size, there's a free version that I use for my home, which is great. When you sign up, you get the free trial and all the bells and whistles. In a larger organization, whether in the public or private sector with multiple departments and a number of buildings, they may benefit from that. For the most part, I don't know if there's anything additional that you would really need. It's just bells and whistles.

    Which other solutions did I evaluate?

    I was able to evaluate TeamViewer, Webex, Zoom, Google Remote Desktop, LogMeIn, and several different VNCs.

    What other advice do I have?

    This solution used to be called ScreenConnect, then ConnectWise bought them out four or five years ago. A little bit of background on the organization: We're a rural school division in Northern Alberta, so we have to cover a lot of geography. It's been apparent in the last couple years with COVID that going out and seeing machines just isn't the way to go like it was 10, 20 years ago.

    We're using this solution as SaaS (Software as a Service). I don't know if they're still offering it on-prem. I think that they went away from that. For some reason, that rings a bell.

    I'm trying to think of anything else that might be a room for improvement for this product. Something I really haven't played around with a whole lot is the PowerShell through this, but it might also just work through the commands section of it. I can't see that as something that's missing in the product. In all fairness, I haven't really done a lot with that as of late.

    Currently, we have six people using this product.

    The beauty of ConnectWise Control is we really don't have to do anything for maintenance. We only need to do a little bit of housekeeping, e.g. if we decommission a machine, we just remove the agent from there and it's gone.

    Any app-specific maintenance is done by ConnectWise, so we have zero responsibility for that. ConnectWise is always great about sending a planned maintenance message out, e.g.: "Between the hours of 2:00 AM and 3:00 AM, the service will be unavailable.", which is the perfect time. I've never had an issue where I've gone in and said: "Oh, they're still doing maintenance. Something must have gone wrong." This is a solid solution.

    Increasing usage of this product isn't out of the question, but not at this point in time. There are some features that are in there that we don't use today, but as far as the number of individuals, it's going to depend on whether my team grows or not. We don't have plans of increasing usage in the near future, but it's not a definite no.

    I would say to anybody who's even thinking about using this solution, is to definitely sign up for the free trial, even if you don't decide to go with it. The setup is so easy. You get 15 days to try it out and that's more than enough time to see exactly what you can do with it and if it's a good fit. I'd be surprised if somebody says: "No, I really don't like this." It's so intuitive. I've got non-technical individuals who just do app support, so they know that one application, and they don't know a lot about servers or computers, but they just absolutely love ConnectWise Control because it's so simple. They search for the machine, double click it, and they're in. That's not oversimplifying it at all. That's literally what they do.

    Definitely do the free trial and let it speak for itself.

    I'm rating this solution a 10 out of 10. It's easily a 10 out of 10, because even though there were some glitches and bugs, it's very rare. I can't even remember anything off the top of my head that was so significant that made me say: "I'm not liking this at all." I'm typically pretty hard on these products because there's so many of them out there, but we definitely have a choice.

    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    Flag as inappropriate
    Chase Cole - PeerSpot reviewer
    Sr. Systems Administrator at Rayburn Electric
    Real User
    Top 20
    Controls all access to our secure network so nothing can get through
    Pros and Cons
    • "It is a real fortress. Its security is very strong. Multi-factor came as a feature out-of-the-box, which was big for us. That helps us meet another compliance requirement. It enforces encryption. Nobody can see what we are doing in our remote system if they happen to be listening for unencrypted traffic. That is its biggest strength."
    • "There is no connectivity to the appliance side. There is no API, and it is just difficult for me to capture what version the device is on without going in and doing screenshots. It is a little too secure in that regard, where they don't even trust their product owner. Since a lot of hacks come from the inside, they are probably doing what they need to do out of necessity. It is just that I have to work pretty hard to produce compliance data on the box."

    What is our primary use case?

    I am in the energy sector. The solution is primarily used for something called interactive remote access. We have a secure environment where we manage the energy grid. The BeyondTrust PRA solution helps us meet a compliance requirement since we need to establish a protocol break before we start working on the electrical grid. Therefore, we don't have to walk into the room where the stuff is. It can be remotely accessed for us internally for the most part.

    Right now, it is in the NERC system, which is the compliance control. This has an electronic access control system that allows us to get to our stuff. It also allows our vendors to possibly get to our stuff.

    How has it helped my organization?

    I use the tool everyday. I am logged into it right now. It allows me to do my job. I know that I am using the right thing, looking at who goes into what. If somebody needs help with a secure site, I can usually hop and help them, then it is done. It is very good and flexible. It allows me to do my job quite well.

    Having a single point of getting anywhere running through its box is like another firewall. It is controlling all access to our secure network so nothing else can get through. Outside of the firewall, it is our network security. 

    What is most valuable?

    It is a real fortress. Its security is very strong. Multi-factor came as a feature out-of-the-box, which was big for us. That helps us meet another compliance requirement. It enforces encryption. Nobody can see what we are doing in our remote system if they happen to be listening for unencrypted traffic. That is its biggest strength.

    Having a VPN just means maintenance. I have worked in the industry for around 10 years and have never enjoyed really working on anything requiring a VPN, either working over it or supporting it. As far as IT is concerned, it is no longer a great technology. We like how this solution uses a protocol that enforces encryption right away, like HTTPS. So, the solution is good to go and takes out one of the moving parts, since VPN can get quite complicated.

    PRA is available in multiple formats: as a physical and virtual appliance, or as SaaS. We appreciate the flexibility, though we went with the physical in our deployment. We might go to the cloud or use a virtual appliance later. Therefore, I appreciate the flexibility. However, we went with the reliable physicals.

    PRA offers SSO authentication, which adds to the encryption suite. You need to have it in order for the appliance to work. It makes compliance easier.

    What needs improvement?

    It is too much of a fortress. It is difficult for us to report on compliance when I need to check for that device. For instance, I need to monitor what version that device is on, and it is quite complicated for us to do that. You can't connect to it traditionally and that is by design. While they have made some improvements in their API connectivity, it is just not quite what I would really like. It requires me to kind of apply some aftermarket steps in order to get what I need.

    There is no connectivity to the appliance side. There is no API, and it is just difficult for me to capture what version the device is on without going in and doing screenshots. It is a little too secure in that regard, where they don't even trust their product owner. Since a lot of hacks come from the inside, they are probably doing what they need to do out of necessity. It is just that I have to work pretty hard to produce compliance data on the box.

    You can usually API into something and get whatever you need. Or, you can have an SSH saying, "Do whatever you need. Just do a Git version command." There is none of that with BeyondTrust. However, this is the least of my concerns compared to whatever it grants us in freedom for all our security compliance requirements that it helps us meet.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I have been using it for three years.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    The physical appliances don't have dual-power supplies. Anytime our power goes out, like even for a second, it has a lot of trouble recovering, even though we have two of them in a cluster. It has trouble recovering after a power-related event on the physical side. We know that we don't really have a redundant BeyondTrust PRA, but they would probably tell me to use a cloud or virtual appliance.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    Scaling is pretty simple. We can stretch it to different operating systems, devices, and command lines. We can use it in any way that we want, either on stuff or from stuff. I am confident we can work with it for whatever needs to be done.

    How are customer service and support?

    The technical support has been okay. There have not been too many inquiries. I have asked questions from a developer on how to connect to it and gather the compliance data and was able to get an answer, which was nice.

    How would you rate customer service and support?

    Positive

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    Some people working remotely have used TeamViewer. However, we have migrated the privileged remote access since then for our security flexibility.

    We looked into this solution for its ability to meet our compliance requirement. It is one of the leaders in Interactive Remote Access. When an auditor or whomever sees the solution, they say, "Okay, you are on BeyondTrust. This should be pretty simple." Out-of-the-box, it meets a lot of requirements. We don't need to go out of our way to prove requirements because they are in the manual of the solution saying, "There is encryption." 

    When the world went remote, we also looked to get off TeamViewer rather quickly and enforce users getting onto a privileged remote access solution. We wanted more control of who could come into the network as well as not be subject to a hack of TeamViewer. Now, we have everything run through our internal network instead of bouncing off Germany.

    How was the initial setup?

    The initial setup was pretty straightforward. It is simple and elegant in its design. It is pretty clear how to get things configured. There are a few quirks with getting some policies in force for particular types of workers. Once you get that down and have it working, it is a set-and-forget solution. It is not nearly as complicated as some other implementations that we have done with different apps.

    It took two weeks to implement.

    What was our ROI?

    Instantly, we were compliant with one of the SIP standards.

    Which other solutions did I evaluate?

    It doesn't allow for multiple monitors without some extra steps. TeamViewer allows you to open a monitor in one tab and another monitor in another, then you can drag that tab to your monitors at home. Therefore, you can have a dual monitor setup at home. BeyondTrust doesn't work like that, and our users hate it. It is possible to do this with RDP technology, but next to email, RDP is one of the least secure protocols in the world. We don't really want to use that, but we have been kind of forced to lately when trying to get away from TeamViewer. That is one thing that TeamViewer has, it can tab to multi-monitor support.

    PRA stands on its own as a full solution. We appreciate their presence in that realm. You will get part of what you want from TeamViewer, but you are getting quite a bit more with a PRA. You can roll it out via on-prem, cloud, or virtual. You control a lot more of it, controlling what people do. Whereas, with TeamViewer, that is so much more difficult. 

    I am considering a cheaper competitor since that is what we moved over from. However, I don't think that we have really looked at many other vendors for this since I have exactly what I need from BeyondTrust.

    What other advice do I have?

    We are monitoring vendor sessions. We will probably start monitoring our own so we can use it to see what happens in regards to a security incident. We can also go back and use it for troubleshooting or see exactly what somebody did inside of their remote session. At some point, we look forward to turning on the session recording. We just hadn't done it yet, not for internal staff.

    There is no unattended remote access for vendors that I am aware of, but we know that we can use the solution to do that. Some have done that in the past. We just don't do it all the time and probably not in the last year.

    My usage of the solution is primarily in the secure network. I don't have any kinds of sounds that I really need to listen to.

    It is hard for us to roll so much trust into one thing at a time, because what happens when that thing is gone? You need to have an adequate backup plan, and we have not quite gone that far yet.

    We have an audit coming up this year, because of that it is hard to really decide to do anything new. We kind of have been told, "Hey, stop getting new stuff. You have to get through the audit first."

    I would rate PRA as 10 out of 10.

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    On-premises
    Disclosure: PeerSpot contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
    Flag as inappropriate
    Justin Glasscock - PeerSpot reviewer
    Privilege Access Management Consultant at Integral Partners LLC
    Consultant
    Top 20
    You can connect to a system without end-user interaction.
    Pros and Cons
    • "I like Remote Support's ability to connect to a system without end-user interaction. A support engineer can log in to the system if a user is stuck and doesn't know where to go. This is helpful when conference room computers get locked down and the user can't access the guest OS."
    • "The ability to connect mobile devices could be improved. Smartphones and tablets are becoming more prevalent throughout corporate environments. From time to time, we have problems connecting to those devices. You can't stage the application to connect without a user's input. You had to guide them through enabling permissions for the app. Then they need to enter the URL and session key. It would be great if they could streamline that process."

    What is our primary use case?

    Remote Support allows the help desk and IT administrative personnel to connect to users' computers as well as kiosks, conference room systems, etc. When I left the company, around 20 employees were using the tool.

    The consulting firm I'm working with now focuses on the BeyondTrust privilege access management applications. Our company takes contracts to install BeyondTrust solutions like Password Safe and Remote Support for client companies.

    How has it helped my organization?

    The two environments where we have Remote Support implemented have satellite offices, so the whole company isn't in one physical location. Remote Support allowed us to centralize that help desk function in one place. We didn't need on-site staff to support the customers. 

    It was also very helpful because COVID forced us to shift to work from home. Everybody was able to provide the same level of support from from home without any notice of any difference from the rest of the employees in the company.

    What is most valuable?

    I like Remote Support's ability to connect to a system without end-user interaction. A support engineer can log in to the system if a user is stuck and doesn't know where to go. This is helpful when conference room computers get locked down and the user can't access the guest OS.

    What needs improvement?

    The ability to connect mobile devices could be improved. Smartphones and tablets are becoming more prevalent throughout corporate environments. From time to time, we have problems connecting to those devices. 

    You can't stage the application to connect without a user's input. You had to guide them through enabling permissions for the app. Then they need to enter the URL and session key. It would be great if they could streamline that process.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I've used Remote Support for about three years.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    The stability of the cloud version was great. We never had any issues with it. We never had any downtime.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    Yes, I think so because we started it with just the company that I installed it at was kind of a holding company, so to speak and we started with our central IT team and then started widening the scope, allowing the other unit companies, IT administrators, to be able to use it and deploy it as they needed. So I think it's definitely very scalable.

    How are customer service and support?

    I would say five their support team has always been very helpful and timely.

    How was the initial setup?

    I would say setting up the cloud version was fairly straightforward. BeyondTrust stood up the application and then handed it over just kind of blank, the company at the time did not want to pay the implementation cost. So integrated it with Azure for single sign on, set up the group policies, I would say it was pretty straightforward.

    So it was kind of an ongoing. Once we got the initials set up and core administrators that would be using the tool set up with local accounts, it did become a more back burner task. I was able to work on it as I was had free time from other tasks. I would say really getting it to the basic usability point of being able to log in on the tool and to be able to connect and help somebody was within a couple hours and then developing the customizations, client deployment installations via group policy, transitioning from using local accounts to Azure AD accounts. If able to tackle in one sitting, probably would've been a few days, but since it was using more free time from other tasks, it was an ongoing process that took weeks and even into a couple of months to kind of get to a very nice deployment flow where everything was set up and easily usable and easy to onboard somebody else into the tool.

    Just one person really. Just me.

    What was our ROI?

    I would say five. I mean, like I said, you're able to connect remotely. You're able to eliminate the costs of having employees either travel to other locations or station full-time employees there with the ability to deploy clients so that you can use to connect to different endpoints without requiring any user interaction. You're able to connect to those systems that may not be in use at the time, traditionally don't have physical access to the operating system, et cetera. So, definitely very, very good in return. And then once you build it out, the ease of onboarding new administrators into the tool.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    I rate Remote Support eight out of 10 for affordability. It's definitely not the cheapest product, but you get a good return on your investment.

    Which other solutions did I evaluate?

    At the last company where I implemented Remote Support, we evaluated other solutions like TeamViewer and the built-in Windows assistance tool, but never functionally utilized them.

    I believe they also had another tool before.  BeyondTrust Remote Support had the most functionality. The price point was a bit higher than others, but it fit the use case perfectly and had everything we were looking for.

    What other advice do I have?

    I rate BeyondTrust Remote Support nine out of 10. It's definitely a useful tool. Out of all the products we tried, it had the most features and flexibility, so it's worth implementing.

    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    Flag as inappropriate
    CEO at Parcom d.o.o. Nova Gorica
    User
    Top 20
    Intuitive and reliable with a useful “always-on” connection
    Pros and Cons
    • "We can also monitor our systems at any time from practically anywhere."
    • "There could be a section in the menu describing the new features and changes."

    What is our primary use case?

    We primarily use the product for offering remote technical support to our clients and customers. We are an outsourcing IT company, and we provide services and support to various businesses in our region.

    We use ISL whenever we have the possibility of connecting to clients remotely. This allows us to be much faster and more flexible in regards to solving any technical issues our clients may have. As ISL works across most operating systems, it allows us to have a single product that covers all areas of our operation.

    How has it helped my organization?

    We are more responsive and efficient now. We can monitor and connect with our clients within minutes of opening the ticket. It helps us to save on cost and time in travel to client's premises.

    We can also monitor our systems at any time from practically anywhere. The software is very intuitive to our customers, therefore, we don’t have to spend a lot of time explaining to them how to use it and how to establish the connection.

    The solution is also very easy to operate. It only takes a few minutes to train new employees.

    ISL allows us to be quick to react and it's also friendly to people who are not most proficient with computers.

    What is most valuable?

    Since we only have to provide an eight-digit number to our customers, it makes the whole process much easier and faster. Some clients have become so familiar with the product, that they have it already ready when we call them and they only ask, “what is the number”. The icon is also very distinguishable, so it’s easy to explain to the customers what to look for on the website or the desktop.

    The ability to set an “always-on” connection is very valuable, as we don’t have to interact directly with the clients to establish the connection. It also allows for a fast glance at the operation of the systems, to see if they are online or not. The ability to save the computers and categorize them in groups also saves us time.

    The stability and reliability of the whole system are very valuable and In our many years of use, we haven’t had one incident, where we weren’t able to provide remote assistance because of ISL issues.

    The sessions can also be paused and transferred to another operator. That way, if one operator has issues, they can be transferred to another technician, without interruption from the client-side. Since everyone can see the active sessions, we can also collaborate much easier.

    What needs improvement?

    I would like to have the feature of seeing the details of the past sessions and for them to be segmented based on the PC name of the technician or some other metric and the name of the remote PC. That would make for an easier overview of the product use per technician and make for easier documentation.

    It would also be nice to have more information about the new features as they are being rolled out. There could be a section in the menu describing the new features and changes.

    Overall the solution is stable and mature.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    We have been using the solution for more than ten years - since 2010.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    It is really stable; we didn’t encounter any downtime or any significant issues.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    I don’t see any issues regarding the scalability of the solution. If we need more licenses, it’s easy to contact the support and resolve the issue.

    How are customer service and support?

    The customer support is very good. They respond quickly and provide quality support.

    How would you rate customer service and support?

    Positive

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    Before ISL we were using TeamViewer. However, due to various issues, we were looking for a replacement and ISL offered everything we needed at a good price.

    With TeamViewer the clients had to install the software, there were always version discrepancies and the general confusion with the ID and password.

    ISL offers a quick solution that doesn’t need any installation on the client-side.

    How was the initial setup?

    The initial setup was very straightforward. We just installed it and integrated it into the website. It didn’t take long before our customers became used to it and started to prefer it over the previous TeamViewer.

    What was our ROI?

    The ROI is very good, it pays off within weeks of regular use.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    I would advise the new users to simply try using it with the evaluation license and see if it fits your business needs. 

    Which other solutions did I evaluate?

    We transitioned directly from Teamviewer to ISL. We first used the evaluation version of ISL and since we were pleased with the solution, we decided to purchase the license.

    What other advice do I have?

    Overall, we are very pleased with this solution, for us, it simply works 99.9% of the time.

    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    Flag as inappropriate
    Husam ALBAROUDI - PeerSpot reviewer
    Senior Software Engineer at Adesso Turkey
    MSP
    Top 10
    Good chat functionality and screen sharing, but not as robust as Microsoft Teams
    Pros and Cons
    • "The security seems good."
    • "There might be some invitation issues with Skype for Business."

    What is our primary use case?

    The product is needed to communicate with people in different locations. Our company is in Germany. I'm in Istanbul. If I have a serious issue on the client side I can use Skype for Business to communicate and resolve issues. 

    What is most valuable?

    I'm using Microsoft Teams, and it's very similar to it. However, I don't actually have more advantages from Teams versus Skype for Business. 

    Screen sharing, control in the session, and file sharing are easy. 

    I like the chat application and the features it offers.

    The security seems good. it may even be more secure than Teams. 

    What needs improvement?

    I'm not sure if it is possible to invite customers to meetings is they are outside the company. There might be some invitation issues with Skype for Business.

    Skype for Business is not as popular as Teams. Teams has a file sharing area, which is useful. That wasn't in the Skype for Business. Skype for Business is just for chatting. However, there are no rich components like in Teams. Teams have a lot of features. Skype isn't as robust. 

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I've only used the solution for eight or nine months. 

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    The stability has been perfect. It's reliable. There are no issues with bugs or glitches. 

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    I'm not sure about the scalability. I don't know how easy it is to add users, for example. That's handled more on the company side. 

    We have about 350 at the company using the product. 

    How are customer service and support?

    I've had an issue in the past and reached out to technical support. They were helpful and responsive. 

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    We've used TeamViewer for very specific accounts. We've also used Microsoft Teams. It's better than Skype for Business as it integrates more effectively.

    How was the initial setup?

    The initial setup is not too difficult or entirely easy. It's somewhere in the middle. It's a moderate setup. 

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    The solution does have a license cost, however, I don't have any knowledge of the exact pricing. 

    What other advice do I have?

    I'm a customer and a user.

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

    I do tend to use normal Skype for personal use. While we use Skype for Business, they are moving more towards Microsoft Teams. 

    Nowadays, you should just maybe buy the Microsoft package. If you are using a Windows laptop, then you need Word, Excel, and PowerPoint. Teams will come with this package. I prefer Microsoft Teams, actually. We have been using Microsoft Teams for the last three or four years.

    I'd rate the solution seven out of ten. 

    It's a good product. It's not that bad. That said, not a lot of people are using it. 

    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    Flag as inappropriate
    Buyer's Guide
    Remote Access
    September 2022
    Get our free report covering TeamViewer, Microsoft, Citrix, and other competitors of TeamViewer. Updated: September 2022.
    635,162 professionals have used our research since 2012.