Re: Using Terminal Services for client support.
From: Ross Smith (junk_at_robinsons.com)
Date: 10/19/04
- Next message: Adie: "Line Wrap - Formatting"
- Previous message: Ramon: "roaming profiles"
- In reply to: James: "Re: Using Terminal Services for client support."
- Next in thread: Vera Noest [MVP]: "Re: Using Terminal Services for client support."
- Reply: Vera Noest [MVP]: "Re: Using Terminal Services for client support."
- Reply: James: "Re: Using Terminal Services for client support."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 16:37:56 +0100
Okay, one final thought and I'll leave you alone ;-)
I may be wrong, but my feeling is that Terminal Services and PC Anywhere are
very different approaches although similar in effect:
Ultimately Terminal Services is designed to allow multiple users to connect
to a single computer at once. To do this, it's going to have to do some
pretty clever internal jiggery-pokery to manage that, and this can throw
some programs out. Even when you're the only person logging in, you're
running a second session on the computer, completely separate to the user
logged on.
PCAnywhere however is designed to simply remote control a single PC. All it
does it emulate the mouse & keyboard and display the screen contents
remotely. If someone is sat in front of the computer at the far end, they
will see the mouse moving and can see the changes you are making.
While the end result is similar at the remote end, it's achieved through
very different means, and I for one would be far happier running
installations and service packs via PCAnywhere. What happens if someone's
running an installation locally when you TS in? With PC Anywhere you would
see the installation in progress. Under Terminal Services, you would have
no idea that anything unusual is happening on the local console.
Security wise, I'd have though PCAnywhere could be configured to be just as
secure as Terminal Services, if not more so. VPN access over the internet
would work fine for both but I'm always wary of granting logon access over
the net. A dial up modem is probably the most secure option you have since
it's only possible to control the machine by dialing in directly with the
correct passwords.
I'd have Terminal Services configured, but only as a fallback for those
times PC Anywhere fails after a reboot or patch.
Ross
<James> wrote in message
news:Xns95874B7AB9CDAjamesnoemailcom@207.46.248.16...
> Our main reason for looking into switching programs is the clients we
> support. Many want us to use Terminal Services to support the servers we
> install rather than having to purchase a PcAnywhere license. We have had
> several new clients claim that it is "older" technology and not as secure
> as Terminal Services, so we decided to research these claims and see what
> issues we might encounter if we switch. We routinely transfer client
> data conversions, add custom reporting for the database we install,
> update software on the server and the like for all our clients and
> PcAnywhere has worked great so far (like Terminal Services, it is not
> without it's share of problems - mainly modem protocols and graphic
> driver issues), but we would like to accommodate our client's wishes if
> possible.
>
> I have heard of certain issues when installing Windows service packs and
> several times when we have had to call Microsoft for support with Web
> issues they specifically requested some form of local console access
> (PcAnywhere was ok for them) and not to use a Terminal Services session
> (as to why, they never did say - except once when installing the Java VM
> and it tanked). I would like to try to get a feel for what problems we
> might encounter before we start our testing and what I can pass along to
> our support staff.
>
>
> Thank you for taking the time to reply.
>
> James
>
> "Ross Smith" <junk@robinsons.com> wrote in
> news:eyARcabtEHA.3788@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl:
>
> > I've had occasional issues with installing and running programs within
> > a client session. Sophos Anti-Virus used to actively detect if you
> > were running in a session and stop the installation to prevent
> > problems with the software.
> >
> > What are your reasons for moving from PcAnywhere? If you're
> > supporting a remote office then I would have thought you would be
> > better sticking with a solution that you know and trust rather than
> > moving to a system that may cause problems later on.
> >
> > Terminal Services is a great tool, I wouldn't be without it, but it's
> > not without it's limitations. At the end of the day, it's horses for
> > courses and if I were in your shoes I think I'd be sticking with
> > PcAnywhere.
> >
> > Ross Smith
> > MCSA
> >
> >
> > "StarQuake" <starquake@antispam.tiscali.nl> wrote in message
> > news:2tila4F1voe9oU1@uni-berlin.de...
> >> news.microsoft.com wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> There are possible issues but in the end I think it's a lot better
> >> than PCAnywhere. Anyway for 1 user you could use XP's remote desktop
> >> connections, there's no functional difference in programs with that.
> >>
> >> --
> >> -----------------------------------------
> >> Visit my site! http://solid.bounceme.net
> >> -----------------------------------------
> >
> >
> >
>
- Next message: Adie: "Line Wrap - Formatting"
- Previous message: Ramon: "roaming profiles"
- In reply to: James: "Re: Using Terminal Services for client support."
- Next in thread: Vera Noest [MVP]: "Re: Using Terminal Services for client support."
- Reply: Vera Noest [MVP]: "Re: Using Terminal Services for client support."
- Reply: James: "Re: Using Terminal Services for client support."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
