Re: Using Terminal Services for client support.
James
Date: 10/20/04
- Next message: Kalle Karlsson: "Memory questions"
- Previous message: Chris Hobby: "Running remote app launches File Download Diaglog"
- In reply to: Ross Smith: "Re: Using Terminal Services for client support."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 06:31:39 -0700
That is the sentiment of myself and the support staff here as well.
Thanks for the time and the response Ross.
James
"Ross Smith" <junk@robinsons.com> wrote in
news:u75bFGftEHA.2876@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl:
> 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: Kalle Karlsson: "Memory questions"
- Previous message: Chris Hobby: "Running remote app launches File Download Diaglog"
- In reply to: Ross Smith: "Re: Using Terminal Services for client support."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
