Microsoft Remote Desktop Services Reviews

My company uses the capabilities of Microsoft Remote Desktop Services to connect with Windows from home.

I have never faced any issues working with Microsoft Remote Desktop Services. You can say that the tool has remote access functionalities that every system or network admin uses. In some case scenarios, we also get the end user to use Microsoft Remote Desktop Services. The tool is simple to use and simple to deploy.

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.

I have been using Microsoft Remote Desktop Services for more than 10 years. I am an end-user of the tool.

Stability-wise, I rate the solution an 8 out of 10.

Scalability-wise, I rate the solution an 8 out of 10.

The product's initial setup phase was easy.

I haven't done the product setup process for a long time.

For those who use Microsoft Azure service, the solution is deployed on the cloud model. If someone uses Windows Server, the solution can be deployed on an on-premises or a local cloud model.

Actually, there are many many other products that provide remote access capabilities. If we compare Microsoft Remote Desktop Services with the other products, I would recommend the virtual network console and maybe a communication application that can be used with Linux OS. If you start with Microsoft, Remote Desktop Services is a very good tool.

The remote work concept came into the picture after COVID-19. Before COVID-19, I was a network admin. Many people were using Microsoft Remote Desktop Services for remote access. In my company, if we are at home and want to check if all the backups are taken care of by automated operations and other related activities, we use Microsoft Remote Desktop Services to connect to the Windows Server.

My company uses many Microsoft products, like Office 365, Microsoft teams, MS Office, Excel and SharePoint. Every company uses Microsoft products. All the four companies I have worked at in the past use Microsoft.

I rate the tool an 8 out of 10.

The solution is a remote desktop service to connect outside our company.

The most valuable feature of Microsoft Remote Desktop Services is that it scales well.

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

The reliability of the solution could improve.

We have approximately 60 to 400 people using the solution.

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

We previously used VMware and switched to Microsoft Remote Desktop Services because the price was lower.

The initial setup of Microsoft Remote Desktop Services was done by our company.

We are going to discontinue the use of this solution within a few months.

The newer versions of the solutions work better than the older ones.

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

I primarily use the solution as a remote desktop. I'm using it over a VPN and SSH too.

I like how it shows the user how you can do things as a help desk service. 

It's part of the Microsoft Operating system and is free. If comes with the larger Microsoft licensing.

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. 

I've used the solution for a long time. I've used the product for more than seven years. I've likely used it since Windows 7.

The stability is okay, depending on the internet connection. I'd rate it seven out of ten for its general level of stability. 

Basic remote services are not very scalable. I'm trying to use InTune instead, which seems to have more of the functionality I need. 

Right now, usage is limited, and we only have ten people on the solution. It's used mainly by people who are not always in the same location. 

User support is limited. They lack documentation. However, there is a learning center at Microsoft.com, which is pretty good. 

Positive

I've used Log Meln previously. It's a lot better, yet it is quite expensive. There's also TeamViewer, which is well known, and we've used it before. Once again, with the things I do, it is expensive. As a company, you need to pay a big fee. It's not ideal for small teams. 

The solution starts off simple in terms of deployment. However, it gets complex. You have to open locked ports, and that can make your network insecure. 

The pricing is great as it's free in the larger Microsoft system. It's integrated with the operating system. For me, the licensing is a five out of five in terms of useability and affordability.

I'm an end-user. 

The solution is used on-prem with VPN tunneling and SSH. With an Azure AD connection, we can use it on the cloud. 

It's not the best, as the users can always see what you are doing, which is not always ideal. I'd rate it six out of ten.

We use it for file repositories, project sharing with Teams, and most of our business intelligence work. We manage around 30 to 40 projects using these resources, mainly on SharePoint.

We use SharePoint here since we're a public university. We have access to all Microsoft platforms. Also, we use Google for email, but they're restricting access for public universities, so we're mostly migrating to Microsoft.

It works well and supports remote work. People can work from home and easily share information. The platform is robust enough for our needs.

We have research projects where students can connect to computers and remotely monitor long experiments, such as charging and recharging cycles of batteries. They don't need to be physically in the lab, which is a good benefit.

It integrates well with existing security and compliance measures

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.

It is used daily in my university. 

It's scalable enough for our needs and very reliable.

Customer service and support were available whenever we needed them. It was always there. We didn't had any issue. 

Positive

The initial setup is easy. It was easy to set up. 

I would recommend it. The core features are very effective, especially for running an organization with geographically distributed people.

Overall, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten. 

I needed the solution to connect to a service. I need fixed IPs. When I'm working from home, I have a dynamic IP. One of our clients has opened a server with a fixed IP for us. We connect to the server using Microsoft Remote Desktop Services.

The solution makes remote work possible. It has made my life easier because I don't have to travel. I can use it from anywhere.

I did not face any problems with the product’s performance. It is stable. The solution is easy to use. The application publishing feature is simple. The tool establishes a simple funnel to the server.

The stability could be improved.

I have been using the solution for 1.5 years.

I rate the tool’s stability a 9 out of 10.

Scalability is not an issue.

The initial setup is easy. The deployment took 10 minutes. I can do the deployment myself. The deployment was not very hard because the tool is part of Windows. We need to set up some parameters with the remote server. They are quite simple steps. I received credentials from the server operator and used them as parameters during the setup. We can reach all the physical servers using the tool.

The tool enables me to work without traveling.

We do not have to pay for the product.

I don't know whether setting up a two-factor authentication in the product is possible. It is quite simple to access the remote server if the setup is done properly. Overall, I rate the product a 9 out of 10.

My company uses Microsoft Remote Desktop Services for our company's accounting software, which doesn't have a cloud solution. In our company, we deployed a server with the help of Microsoft Remote Desktop Services.

The solution's most valuable feature is that it's a technology that we are familiar with in our company. Microsoft Remote Desktop Services has been around since Windows NT 4 domain, making it a very familiar solution. It was easy to find a lot of clients familiar with the idea of Microsoft Remote Desktop Services since it was not a new concept to them. In general, the solution tends to work well. It is an easy-to-use solution.

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.

I have been using Microsoft Remote Desktop Services for five to six years. I work at an IT support company that resells, implements, and offers support for Microsoft products.

My company is happy with the stability of the solution.

I think it's a very scalable product. The product's scalability depends on how big our company's clients are, so it is not an area we need to worry about since you can use its gateway server for different servers.

My company works with small and medium-sized businesses using Microsoft Remote Desktop Services.

The solution's technical support doesn't get covered under Office 365.

My experience with other Microsoft support, apart from Office 365, has not been that fantastic since I remember being quite shocked using the solution.

I haven't used support for Microsoft Remote Desktop Services.

The installation of Microsoft Remote Desktop Services was easy.

The installation of Microsoft Remote Desktop Services takes around four hours.

The solution is deployed on the cloud and on-premises.

A single technician is involved with the deployment part of the product in our company.

In our company, we consider Microsoft Remote Desktop Services as more of an added service than something that generates income for us. We do make a little bit of income with the help of the solution, but most of all, it's just a value-added service that the product provides for our company. Our company won't get rich by selling Microsoft Remote Desktop Services.

The solution is expensive. My company pays toward the monthly licensing costs of the solution, though we also have the option to opt for perpetual licensing offered by Microsoft. Microsoft licensing models are quite complex, so we tend to use a monthly subscription-based model in our company.

The additional cost, apart from the solution's licensing cost, is related to the technical support a user wants.

Though not a lot, some maintenance is required for the solution. One person can do the maintenance of the solution.

I would tell those planning to use the solution not to underspec the server, especially with IOPS, while keeping in mind that the amount of RAM can be more than expected. I would say that the need for a VPN, owing to security reasons, is important.

I rate the overall solution a nine out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for security purposes. For example, blocking copy-paste.

The solution works well as a remote desktop. 

The security is good. It can block copy-paste attempts. 

It's a straightforward product.

The user interface is good. It's just a plain Windows interface. It's easy to understand. 

It is very easy to set up.

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.

I've been using the solution for 20 years. I've used it for two decades or so. It's been used by me for a long time. 

While the solution is stable, it is sometimes slow. I'd rate the stability at eight out of ten. It is mostly reliable.

Windows isn't really scalable. I'd rate it six out of ten in terms of scalability.

We use the solution enterprise-wide. We likely have 100 people using it. We do not have plans to increase usage.

I've never used technical support in the past.

I have used Citrix in the past as well. I used it for different use cases. We like Microsoft for its small-scale simplicity. It is not VDI, per se. It's just a remote desktop.

The initial setup is very simple and straightforward. The product is very simple. 

Its deployment only takes a half-day. The software makes everything very easy. you just buy the license and install it. I'm not very technical and therefore don't know all of the steps. 

One person who is knowledgeable can handle the initial setup. Typically, it doesn't require anyone with high skill levels. 

We can handle the setup ourselves. 

The ROI isn't the best as it is a pretty expensive product. 

You do need to pay for a license and it is expensive. We have a perpetual license. The more users you have the more expensive it can be.

We are using the latest version of the solution. We are using the solution that comes with the Windows Server between 2019 and 2022.

I'd recommend the solution to others. 

I would rate the solution eight out of ten.

We use Remote Desktop Services for a few things. My experience started with Microsoft Remote Desktop when I tried to reuse really low power desktop machines to turn them from these desktop machines into class remote desktop terminals. That is my initial experience with Microsoft Remote Desktop. My most current experience with Microsoft Remote Desktop is using a specific Microsoft product on the servers where you don't have any chance to administer them using the web browser. SCCM, active directory administration and other Wintel server roles are most handy and the most secure to administer from the Microsoft Management Console. Therefore, you need to do it at least from some instance of the Microsoft windows server.

I like that it works. In most cases, it's predictable. You know what you get.

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.

With this new company, I have been using this solution for two and a half years, but overall I have 15 years of experience.

It is being used mainly on a Mac platform.

I would say it's stable.

In the last setup, we had 3,000 users. It wasn't the nicest experience.

My experience with support is varied. It really depends. It varies depending on which support line you get. If you say you're a particular engineer then they won't really bother to support you. But if you say you have an enterprise contract and that you're a big company and you have a contract then they offer better support.

We previously used Citrix. Microsoft Remote Desktop Services is a more developed version of Citrix.

I would recommend going for VMware.

Microsoft programs are never easy to install but the installation wasn't something we didn't expect.

We deployed it on our own.

We use enterprise orchestration so it doesn't take too long to deploy. Microsoft products do not really play along with the open-source orchestration platforms. Once you overcome this, it becomes easier.

I would not recommend going with this solution because I wouldn't recommend going for a big enterprise setup. 

I would rate it a four out of ten. 

In the next release, they should develop better support for remote desktops for alternative platforms. It's really lacking consistency. If I have to support terminal server clusters and I have to do change management on the big cluster, then I actually run into a lot of issues both on the Microsoft Remote Desktop as well as Citrix. They should provide a consistent user experience. It's a pain to roll out changes into a different mode of the cluster and to propagate them over multiple modes. I end up in a situation where a portion of my users get the changes and the other portion doesn't.