Microsoft Remote Desktop Services Reviews

The solution is user-friendly and has a good user experience. 

Microsoft should be more compatible with other operating system. 

I have been using Microsoft Remote Desktop Services for a few years. 

Microsoft is a stable solution. I rate the stability a ten out of ten. 

Only one user using the solution. 

Previously we used VMware but Microsoft is easy to deploy. 

The initial setup is straightforward. The deployment takes a few seconds. 

There is a licensing cost. 

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

Microsoft Remote Desktop Services is used to connect to other systems.

Microsoft Remote Desktop Services has helped our organization because it provides easier access to desktops without having to be physically on-site.

The most valuable feature of Microsoft Remote Desktop Services is the ability to remote into a system that is not on-premises.

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.

I have used Microsoft Remote Desktop Services within the last 12 months.

The stability of Microsoft Remote Desktop Services is very good.

The scalability could improve by having a multi-session manager.

Our IT department uses Microsoft Remote Desktop Services.

The initial setup of Microsoft Remote Desktop Services is simple, it is not complex.

Microsoft Remote Desktop Services comes free as part of Microsoft Windows.

I rate Microsoft Remote Desktop Services a nine out of ten.

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. 

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.

I use the solution to connect to different servers.

The solution is really fast. Every company can use it.

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

The performance of Remote Desktop Services could be better.

I have been using the solution for three years.

The stability of the solution is good. I rate the stability a ten out of ten.

I rate the scalability of the solution a ten out of ten. About 1000 employees are using the solution in our organization.

The initial setup is straightforward. We can find the necessary information on the Internet.

We need five employees, including managers, administrators, and engineers, to deploy and maintain the solution.

It is a cloud-based solution. We can use the solution on a local server or the cloud, depending on our organization's needs. I would recommend the solution to others. It is useful and straightforward. Overall, I rate the solution a ten out of ten.

I use Remote Desktop to do a credential swap where it goes from being the explicit user accessing the endpoint to a privileged credential.

What I do is, in the connection process with RDP, the user logs into the PAM tool as first name.last name, which is his normal domain account. However, BeyondTrust, with the remote desktop connection, substitutes the user's first name.last name with a privileged credential that looks like his name. It would be like A-first.last. This is so that we can also perform session recording and keystroke logging, as well as keep a detailed log of who is connected to which desktop and which account.

The most valuable suite feature for us is that it's light. It's built into the operating system and has a command line interface capability to insert credentials, IDs, a password, et cetera.

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.

I’ve used the solution for 20 to 25 years.

The solution is rock solid. It’s stable and reliable. There are no bugs or glitches, and it doesn’t crash or freeze.

The sky is the limit in terms of scalability. It’s not a problem at all if you need to expand. The only limiting factor is the budget. Obviously, the more you grow, the more you pay.

Tens of thousands of people use the solution. The primary use is to segregate a user from a direct login to a desktop.

The solution is actually built into the larger product. We pretty much just have to secure the connection.

It's actually maintained as part of the standard windows update tools and also could be updated manually with specific patches that might be something more specific to your organization. I've only experienced that once and that was years ago.

I’m implementing the remote desktop for customers.

It’s built-in. It’s free. It doesn’t cost extra.

We are Microsoft partners.

The deployment is both on-prem and cloud. If I was working with an organization that is a monster and they're distributed or maybe even a multinational or multi-state, I would use Azure Cloud and do use the Azure remote desktop solution.

There are so many different types of uses. In my use case, it is so painfully specific for connection brokering. We use it as part of the built-in connection process with our PAM tool. You can actually just sit down at your desktop and then do a start run, and then run MSTSC, which means micro soft terminal services client, which is a remote desktop. You can connect to one of your own computers at home, or you could connect to a server. However, you have to know the ID and password to connect. I circumvent that by doing a command line connection where I insert the credentials and the users connect, not even knowing what ID or password they're using to connect with.

I’d rate the solution ten out of ten. It’s a meat and potatoes product.

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.

I have been using Microsoft Remote Desktop Services for approximately 20 years.

I have found Microsoft Remote Desktop Services to be stable.

I have not used technical support.

The installation is straightforward.

The solution comes free with Microsoft Windows.

I would recommend this solution to others.

I rate Microsoft Remote Desktop Services a nine out of ten.

We're using Microsoft Remote Desktop to remotely log into computers via terminal services.

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

About a year.

Installing Microsoft Desktop Services is straightforward. It was handled by the vendor. 

I rate Microsoft Desktop Services eight out of 10. At the moment, I wouldn't recommend it to others.