Microsoft Remote Desktop Services Reviews

When I'm in the office I use the solution to connect to another server to look at files or services that are running, things like that. When working from home I use it to connect to our VPN and then to my work computer and pretty much do everything that way. I'm a senior software analyst at an educational institution and I believe we have a partnership with Microsoft. 

Because of Covid, the solution has given those stuck at home the ability to continue working.

I think the price of this product is great. The solution allows me the option of using two monitors. I like the screen draw in Remote Desktop, it's better than GoToMyPC, which I've used previously although the improvement could also be related to a better internet connection over the past six months. 

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.

I've been using this solution for six months. 

The solution is stable. 

Scalability is not really relevant but the solution is used by a fair number of the IT staff. 

I've never needed to use technical support. 

I previously used GoToMyPC because I used to do upgrades from home at night. We were paying for that solution which wasn't necessary with the free Microsoft option. I used both of them for a short time and realized Remote Desktop really seemed to draw the screen better and also everybody else was using it. 

The initial setup is straightforward. You've got to have the IP address of the computer you're connecting to - in our organization it's managed by our network manager.

I would recommend this solution. 

I rate this product an eight out of 10. 

If any of our clients using the internet are facing an issue, we connect Microsoft Remote Desktop Services and troubleshoot the exact issue.

Things can be made easier if someone is not with us or at a long distance since we can connect easily with those people. So, it's easy for us to use such features.

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.

I have been using Microsoft Remote Desktop Services for one or two months. Also, I am using the solution's latest version.

The network issue is something that causes us to invest longer time duration in connecting, after which it gets disconnected. Hence, I rate the solution's stability nine and a half out of ten.

It is a scalable solution. Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten. Around five to ten of our clients are users using the solution. Also, the solution is being used extensively.

I do have plans to increase the usage of the solution. The number of users is increasing. In the last month, we have had two or three potential clients in the pipeline. In the near future, its usage will increase.

I have never contacted technical support.

The solution's initial setup process was straightforward. The deployment process took around a week.

Deployment steps are followed. For every network deployment, it is necessary to generate a single token. Once this token is generated, payment will be required. Once we obtain the UI connector, it is essential to verify that everything is running smoothly. Only then can it be directly connected, ensuring that the deployment process takes place without any issues.

Regarding the deployment of one server, if done by someone knowledgeable with Microsoft products, then it can be done directly. Else it will take a month since we need time to learn all these things. An engineer looks into a few things.

The implementation can be done in-house.

The solution is expensive. Since things are made to be a bit easier in the solution, the solution's cost is a bit on the higher side.

I will recommend it to others when I think it's quite an easy tool, especially if its implementation is easy. We should also be able to connect and solve our problems through troubleshooting issues remotely. For long-distance purposes, the tool gets quite easier for its users. I will recommend that everyone should use it.

Overall, I rate the solution a ten out of ten.

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'm a technical manager and we are customers of Microsoft.

The solution has very smooth connectivity and is a very user friendly product. An additional advantage is that it works with very low bandwidth. 

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.

I've been using this solution for the last five years. 

The solution is stable. 

The product is scalable, we have over 500 users. 

The quality of the technical support is quite good although it's often dependent on the quality of the Microsoft partner. If the partner is good, then support is good but if not, there can be issues. 

The pricing in comparison to similar products is quite good.

I would suggest a UAT test on a smaller group or pilot deployment. Once you do a test run on the pilot deployment, then it should be rolled out for a larger base of users.

In terms of overall experience, I rate the solution eight out of 10. 

We use Microsoft Remote Desktop if we want, for example, to help a user that has a problem. We can also use it to take the control of a computer on a remote location.

The simplicity of the product has been most valuable to me. This is especially true if you use a Microsoft product to connect to Microsoft Remote Desktop. There is no broker in between. Microsoft Remote Desktop is something that comes with Windows at no cost unless you use a Microsoft server.

For me, it boils down to simplicity. There is no cost and the setup is easy. 

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.

I have been using Microsoft servers for more than 20 years. My first Microsoft server was NT 3.5.

Microsoft Remote Desktop is quite stable product now, particularly if you compare it to previous version.

Microsoft Remote Desktop is scalable. 

The technical support is good. I have had some issues with them, but most of time the technical support is good. Phone support is difficult for me to use but the Microsoft Knowledge Base has been helpful. It is easy to find solutions to problems in the knowledge base. You can also get email support, which is useful. 

We are a solution integrator and Microsoft Remote Desktop Services is one of the products that we have been implementing for our clients. This software provides a Windows 10 desktop on a virtual machine.

It's a multi-session VDI solution that allows people to work from home. It allows users to access company resources and applications, which is important because we don't want them using their personal home networks to access corporate devices. This helps prevent problems such as the introduction of a computer virus from home to office.

The most valuable feature is the remote application access. You can update applications and assign them to different groups of users. For example, one user might require Microsoft Visio, whereas another user does not require it. Access can be granted by segmenting users into different groups.

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.

I have been working with RDS for about three years.

Generally, this solution is stable.

Scalability-wise, it is very good. There is auto-scaling, so if there are more users required then Azure will help you to automatically manage it. In addition, it is HA, so I think that the overall scalability is pretty good.

I have not been in contact with technical support. There is a good community of people who write about Microsoft solutions in blogs, which is helpful.

Setting up the basic service is quite simple. It's more of managing your Windows image, such as a Windows 10 image, which probably requires some expertise. It is very fast to deploy and you can have everything ready within a day.

The setup is quite clear and you don't need a team to do it. All of the instructions are available on the internet and because it's a Microsoft solution, there are many blogs available with the steps for you to follow.

It will probably cost about $500 USD to get the resources set up in the cloud.

My advice to anybody who is implementing this solution is to first ensure that the network is set up properly. The applications need to be set up properly because if the applications are being used on-premises, but the virtual machines are stored in the cloud, then you will incur additional charges for accessing them.

This is a good solution, although it is still new compared to some other remote desktop services that have been out there for a very long time. It still has room for improvement such as accessing the microphone for Android remote access. Because of this, using it on an Android device may not be the best choice.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We have deployed Microsoft Remote Desktop Services for logistics, CNC, and machine shop areas. I think that is very flexible in order to provide the correct maintenance and deploy the services.

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.

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

Microsoft Remote Desktop Services is stable. However, the first stage was a bit unstable because you need to spend time in order to set up all the settings in a proper way based on the organization. The system is stable and functional when set up the correct way.

Microsoft Remote Desktop Services is scalable.

You have to set up an additional remote desktop server in order to leverage the resource in terms of elaboration RAM et cetera.

We have approximately 40 people using this solution in my company.

We work with a partner for our support.

We have used Citrix previously and it is more stable but it's a more expensive platform. 

The initial setup of Microsoft Remote Desktop Services is easy.

Microsoft Remote Desktop Services is less expensive than some other solutions on the market.

I rate the price of Microsoft Remote Desktop Services a three out of five.

I would recommend this solution to others.

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

Our use case is two-fold. We use it for securing workplaces in our on-premise environment for remote users. We also use it for management. We manage most of our environments from a secure remote desktop in our data center. We connect through a remote desktop gateway with a two-factor application installed there.

The most valuable feature of this solution at the moment is the HTML5 web client. You get a browser experience, not just the terminal sort of client, and the integration with Azure multi-factor application.

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.

I have been using this solution for eight years.

It is very reliable.

It is very scalable. At the moment, we have around 2,000 users.

We have a Premier support contract, and it works great.

Its initial setup was straightforward. Because of COVID-19, we had to deploy workspaces for our users. It was fairly simple to deploy our RDS farm so that our users could work safely from home.

Its licensing is on a yearly basis. We're on the educational or academic license, and our terms are good. We're very happy with the pricing.

I would recommend this solution. I would rate Microsoft Remote Desktop Services an eight out of ten.