Microsoft Remote Desktop Services Reviews

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.

I use RDS to connect our servers.

The most valuable part of RDS is that it allows you to work from any location and check the server through a VPN connection.

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.

I've been using RDS for around ten years.

The cloud version's scalability is better than on-prem.

Microsoft's technical support is helpful, but its speed could be better.

The initial setup is very simple.

I would rate RDS eight out of ten.

The solution is primarily for remote desktop services. It's used to start up a desktop service, and we can use a password and a user name to work remotely on other servers.

The product is very easy to use. 

The solution's implementation process is simple. 

It's pretty stable. 

It can scale well.

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

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

We've used the product for two years now. It was implemented at the beginning of COVID.

The stability is okay in most cases. Sometimes, especially in the beginning, we had some problems. However, that was due to the implementation of this solution. At this moment it's very stable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

The scalability, as far as I know, is not an issue. We moved all employees to this solution. We started with a few, and now almost a thousand colleagues are using this solution. Therefore, for us, in our experience, the solution looks very good if you need to scale.

I've never been in contact with Microsoft technical support. 

Before this solution, we used Citrix.

The solution has a straightforward setup. It's not very complex at all. 

Its deployment took a few weeks. 

The organization, during the start of COVID, had a lot of colleagues started working from home, and it seemed that the Citrix solution was not capable of doing that, so the ICT offices switched to Remote Desktop Services to accommodate people working from home. Our strategy was to have that capability.

The deployment and maintenance are handled by a third party. They aren't necessarily dedicated, however, they are they if something needs to be done. 

We had a third-party integrator that assisted with the implementation. 

I haven't witnessed an ROI. 

We use the solution. We're customers.

We're using the latest version of the solution. 

We use Microsoft Authenticator to log on, which is straightforward. 

I would recommend the solution to others. I suggest they just go for it. It's a very good solution. 

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

Microsoft Remote Desktop Services could improve by having graphical acceleration.

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

Microsoft Remote Desktop Services is stable and reliable.

The scalability of Microsoft Remote Desktop Services is good.

I have not needed to call the support from Microsoft Remote Desktop Services because the solution is easy to use.

I have previously used other solutions, such as Citrix and VMware. Citrix is the best choice of the ones I have tried.

The initial setup of Microsoft Remote Desktop Services is very easy.

The price of Microsoft Remote Desktop Services is reasonable.

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

As an internal Microsoft product, we find it very trustworthy. It's quite secure. It connects easily to Windows operating systems on devices. 

The performance meets our requirements and the stability is good.

The solution scales well.

The setup process is easy.

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.

Although I don't use it consistently, I have used it for ten to 15 years. It's a pretty old solution. 

The solution is stable. The performance is good. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's very reliable. 

The scalability is okay. Sometimes we deploy a server-client scenario, so many clients can connect to the same server and they can log in at the same time simultaneously. There's no issue with scalability in that sense.

We have 50 users on the product currently.

We've never had any real issues. I haven't dealt with technical support.

In terms of the initial setup, the implementation process is simple and straightforward. It's not difficult. 

Since it is not a new solution, most of the engineers know how to deploy and how to operate it; we are not waiting for further technical documents for assistance.

Since it was quite easy to deploy, we did not need any outside assistance from integrators or consultants. 

While it's connected to the cloud, it's a solution that is currently on-premises. 

I'm not sure if we are using a specific version. Whatever options that come with Microsoft, we use that. Since they upgraded Microsoft (for example, earlier it was Microsoft XP, and Windows 7, 8, 9, 10, et cetera), the options come up throughout those operating systems. We use whatever they offer.

I would recommend the solution to others. I'd rate it at a nine out of ten. We've had a good experience with it over a number of years. 

The solution helps users to access desktops remotely.

The solution performs well and is easy to use.

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. 

I rate the solution's stability as a nine.

We have used VNC Viewer, UltraVNC, and TeamViewer before.

The solution is easy to install.

The solution's license is affordable.

I recommend the solution to others and rate it as a nine.

We predominantly use Microsoft Remote Desktop Services to access our server. Our team works remotely and needs to log in to perform tasks such as billing. We had two options: either use our existing internal infrastructure or move to the cloud. However, we also required remote printing services so that team members could print from their local desktops. To achieve this, we implemented terminal printing services, VPN, and remote desktop. The purpose was to enable both on-site and remote team members to perform billing tasks, invoicing, and tracking truck movement.

Microsoft Remote Desktop Services meets all our requirements.

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.

I have been using the solution for eight months.

I give the stability a nine out of ten.

I give the scalability an eight out of ten.

The initial setup is straightforward. We activated the solution smoothly and completed the deployment within a day. Beforehand, the distributor's tech team came to discuss our network and gain an understanding of everything. It took them a day to configure the solution. Although everything went smoothly thereafter, we encountered some initial challenges. Specifically, we faced issues connecting to the local and remote printers, as printing services were not functioning properly. To address this, we worked on it for a day and met our requirements within two to three days. It's worth noting that the solution isn't entirely plug-and-play, and there are challenges that require mitigation.

The implementation was completed in-house with the help of the distributor techs.

The cost is fair.

I give the solution a ten out of ten.

We have around 70 people using the solution within our Accounting, Billing, and Sales departments.

I recommend Microsoft Remote Desktop Services to others.

It allows me to remotely take control of a desktop if my wife or son has a problem.

I have been using the solution for one or two years. 

The solution is stable.

It doesn't need to be scalable in my case as I only implement the solution on a few desktops at home. 

I've had good experiences with Microsoft customer support. 

It was easy for me, but I have experience working in this field.

I would say it's expensive as there similar products available for free. 

I rate this solution a seven out of ten.