Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Free Remote Access Tools For Windows and Mac Compared

timothy posted more than 4 years ago | from the wish-you-were-here-printing dept.

Microsoft 152

snydeq writes "InfoWorld's Keith Schultz provides an in-depth comparison of seven free remote access tools for Windows, four of which offer compatibility with the Mac. 'As you read about each tool, you'll notice that I put a lot of emphasis on remote printing. I rely on remote access tools on a daily basis, and in most cases I need to be able to print to my remote PC. For someone that just wants to check their home/office email account or view documents from outside the office, all of the utilities here will work fine. But for those trying to get some serious work done, remote printing may be the deal breaker.' Many of the free tools under review offer paid or licensed versions for access to additional features."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

cmdrtaco has a tiny wang (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32020154)

cmdrtaco has a penis smaller than a baby penis

What a nice review! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32020282)

What a nice review...

...for me to poop on!

Re:cmdrtaco has a tiny wang (1)

MrNaz (730548) | more than 4 years ago | (#32022356)

Blatantly hijacking Micropenis FP to get this point in:

The review of VNC says that it is not firewall friendly, and that the network admin has to open a port and point it at the machine in question. While this is true of VNC in general, they specifically mention UltraVNC which has a nifty proxy feature. I use this very successfully on some of the networks I admin.

Basically, you run the proxy server on one machine that has the port forwarded to it from the firwall. Then, your UVNC clients enter the *local* IP or hostname of the machine they want to get to, and there's an extra field for the proxy's address, which is the real-world IP or hostname that you'd use to contact the proxy.

It works very well, is free/open source, provides access to whole networks behind a firewall without the need for individual configurations to the firewall on every incoming connection and allows for some very efficient connection compression giving usable speeds even over slow connections.

That the article doesn't mention it is pretty poor form, given that IMHO its the best all-round solution to this problem.

They're all free! (4, Informative)

ProdigyPuNk (614140) | more than 4 years ago | (#32020178)

...Unless you want something besides a demo version.

Many of the free tools listed here also have paid versions that offer additional features (such as support for remote printing) or licensing (extra host computers or clients). For some users, the paid version will be the only true option.

...and I was getting all excited, too. TBH, I switched to Linux a few months ago and remote administration/printing/etc is one of the pluses. It's great to be at school, think "Uh-oh, forgot that term paper," and be able to grab it off the desktop at home.

Re:They're all free! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32020240)

A couple weeks ago, while taking my asian girlfriend shopping at the local mall, I had to take a piss. As I entered the john, Steve Jobs -- the messiah himself -- came out of one of the booths. I stood at the urinal looking at him out of the corner of my eye as he washed his hands. He didn't once look at me. He was busy and in any case I was sure the security guards wouldn't even let me shake his hand.

As soon as he left I darted into the booth he'd vacated, hoping there might be a lingering smell of shit and even a seat still warm from his sturdy ass. I found not only the smell but the shit itself. He'd forgotten to flush. And what a treasure he had left behind. Three or four beautiful specimens floated in the bowl. It apparently had been a fairly dry, constipated shit, for all were fat, stiff, and ruggedly textured. The real prize was a great feast of turd -- a nine inch gastrointestinal triumph as thick as his cock -- or at least as I imagined it!

I knelt before the bowl, inhaling the rich brown fragrance and wondered if I should obey the impulse building up inside me. I'd always been a liberal thinker and had been an Apple customer since 1984. Of course I'd had fantasies of meeting Jobs, sucking his cock and balls, not to mention sucking his asshole clean, but I never imagined I would have the chance. Now, here I was, confronted with the most beautiful five-pound turd I'd ever feasted my eyes on, a sausage fit to star in any fantasy and one I knew to have been hatched from the asshole of Steve Jobs, the chosen one.

Why not? I plucked it from the bowl, holding it with both hands to keep it from breaking. I lifted it to my nose. It smelled like rich, ripe limburger (horrid, but thrilling), yet had the consistency of cheddar. What is cheese anyway but milk turning to shit without the benefit of a digestive tract?

I gave it a lick and found that it tasted better then it smelled.

I hesitated no longer. I shoved the fucking thing as far into my mouth as I could get it and sucked on it like a big half nigger cock, beating my meat like a madman, and thrusting my pink iPod Shuffle into my ass. I wanted to completely engulf it and bit off a large chunk, flooding my mouth with the intense, bittersweet flavor. To my delight I found that while the water in the bowl had chilled the outside of the turd, it was still warm inside. As I chewed I discovered that it was filled with hard little bits of something I soon identified as peanuts. He hadn't chewed them carefully and they'd passed through his body virtually unchanged. I ate it greedily, sending lump after peanutty lump sliding scratchily down my throat. My only regret was that Steve Jobs wasn't there to see my loyalty and wash it down with his piss.

I soon reached a terrific climax. I caught my cum in the cupped palm of my hand and drank it down. Believe me, there is no more delightful combination of flavors than the hot sweetness of cum with the rich bitterness of shit. It's even better than reading an Apple press release!

Afterwards I was sorry that I hadn't made it last longer. But then I realized that I still had a lot of fun in store for me. There was still a clutch of virile turds left in the bowl. I tenderly fished them out, rolled them into my handkerchief, and stashed them in my briefcase. In the week to come I found all kinds of ways to eat the shit without bolting it right down. Once eaten it's gone forever unless you want to filch it third hand out of your own asshole. Not an unreasonable recourse in moments of desperation or simple boredom.

I stored the turds in the refrigerator when I was not using them but within a week they were all gone. The last one I held in my mouth without chewing, letting it slowly dissolve. I had liquid shit trickling down my throat for nearly four hours. I must have had six orgasms in the process.

I often think of Steve Jobs dropping solid gold out of his sweet, pink asshole every day, never knowing what joy it could, and at least once did, bring to a grateful Apple customer.

Re:They're all free! (5, Interesting)

je ne sais quoi (987177) | more than 4 years ago | (#32020428)

The whole reason I use macs at work is that it's underpinnings are unix so I can use all those great tools that I use on linux at home and on my computing clusters on the mac. So, my remote computing solution is fuse, sshfs, fink and X11.app on the mac side, and ssh. Works like a charm. I even have konqueror installed on my desktop mac so I can have a remote gui file browser.

Re:They're all free! (1)

loufoque (1400831) | more than 4 years ago | (#32020620)

I don't get why you don't use linux at work instead of mac.

Re:They're all free! (1)

Sancho (17056) | more than 4 years ago | (#32021096)

Probably because he doesn't want to actually manage his computer.

I love Linux and run it at home, but I regularly have to tweak things or they simply don't work. Macs are a good middle-ground between functionality and ease-of-use.

Re:They're all free! (1)

loufoque (1400831) | more than 4 years ago | (#32021392)

If you can make it work at home, you can make it work at work.
Plus you'll likely be more productive if you keep using the same environment all day.

Re:They're all free! (3, Informative)

Sancho (17056) | more than 4 years ago | (#32021442)

If you can make it work at home, you can make it work at work.
Plus you'll likely be more productive if you keep using the same environment all day.

If I have to spend a lot of time making something work, that's not productive. On my own time, I'm allowed to be unproductive. At work, if I'm spending time fiddling around making my OS run, I'm not doing real work.

Re:They're all free! (1)

soppsa (1797376) | more than 4 years ago | (#32021932)

I'm much the same. I develop high performance application hosting platforms, in Linux (and to a lesser extent fBSD) but my work computer is a Mac. I actually need my desktop to be productive no matter what. Guess what, once you grow past the oMG Steve Jobs Is Teh Evil crap, the Mac is a great UNIX platform to do your day to day work on...

Re:They're all free! (1)

loufoque (1400831) | more than 4 years ago | (#32021938)

If I have to spend a lot of time making something work, that's not productive.

You would be surprised.
Studies show that if instead of using a good-enough environment for work, people dedicated some time to make their work environment better or got training at using their tools better, they could significantly increase their productivity, to much higher levels than what any project management technique can achieve.

The simplest things like typing training gives quite an impressive boost.

Speed is the deal-breaker (3, Insightful)

h00manist (800926) | more than 4 years ago | (#32023440)

The only things I have used that had reasonable speed for real work were RDP, Citrix, and LTSP. I used vnc, tightvnc and ultravnc many times, but never found it to be usable for day-to-day stuff.

Re:They're all free! (1)

socz (1057222) | more than 4 years ago | (#32021636)

Probably because he doesn't want to actually manage his computer.

I love Linux and run it at home, but I regularly have to tweak things or they simply don't work. Macs are a good middle-ground between functionality and ease-of-use.

Try FreeBSD & Ports Collection :>

Re:They're all free! (1)

serviscope_minor (664417) | more than 4 years ago | (#32022684)

I regularly have to tweak things or they simply don't work.

I call shennanigans! You change your work computer often enough that you regularly have to tweak things? This seems somewhat unlikely. Once you have your working set of hardware and software, and all your user preferences set up, what is there to change?

Re:They're all free! (1)

Bugamn (1769722) | more than 4 years ago | (#32021114)

Because Linux doesn't have Steve Jobs' Magic (tm).

Re:They're all free! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32021918)

TBH, I switched to Linux a few months ago and remote administration/printing/etc is one of the pluses. It's great to be at school, think "Uh-oh, forgot that term paper," and be able to grab it off the desktop at home.

Um, remote printing means printing from the remote end to a local printer. Not from the remote end to a remote printer (whoopididydoo). How does Linux help you to this end? Yah, you could ssh port forward a local print server I guess, and use scp for data, but this really doesn't compare to Remote Desktop and such. Calling that a plus for Linux made me laugh :)

Re:They're all free! (1)

Blakey Rat (99501) | more than 4 years ago | (#32022924)

TBH, I switched to Linux a few months ago and remote administration/printing/etc is one of the pluses. It's great to be at school, think "Uh-oh, forgot that term paper," and be able to grab it off the desktop at home.

What were you using before that didn't have this? A TRS-80 perhaps?

Re:They're all free! (3, Informative)

T-Bone-T (1048702) | more than 4 years ago | (#32023062)

Microsoft Remote Desktop Connection is free for all Windows and Apple users and is the full version. You don't even have to install it on Windows, it already is installed(provided you have the right versions of Windows).

Re:They're all free! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32024020)

...and I was getting all excited, too. TBH, I switched to Linux a few months ago and remote administration/printing/etc is one of the pluses. It's great to be at school, think "Uh-oh, forgot that term paper," and be able to grab it off the desktop at home.

If accessing term papers, etc. is the main thing you want it for, just use Dropbox.

Print to remote PC? (1)

BadAnalogyGuy (945258) | more than 4 years ago | (#32020184)

You mean print from your remote PC to your local printer, right?

And what about device recognition? Drag/Drop capability? Touch panel integration? USB/DVD device detection?

I use remote desktop software on a daily basis as well, and these issues vex me.

lpr (4, Funny)

Hatta (162192) | more than 4 years ago | (#32020218)

You shouldn't need any extra software to print remotely in OS X. Just cat a postscript file over SSH and into lpr on the remote machine.

Re:lpr (1)

edmicman (830206) | more than 4 years ago | (#32020806)

Haha, it's that easy!

Re:lpr (2, Informative)

CronoCloud (590650) | more than 4 years ago | (#32021740)

It's even easier if the remote machine has CUPS setup so you can access the printer remotely via IPP. You can then just add the printer via whatever GUI frontend you want and print directly to it from your applications.

Teamviewer is the bane of the computer guy (5, Funny)

alen (225700) | more than 4 years ago | (#32020228)

i used to tell my mom who lives 2000 miles away "i don't know" or "I need to be there"

now i can have desktop access to her laptop over the internet. and for free

Re:Teamviewer is the bane of the computer guy (1, Redundant)

sconeu (64226) | more than 4 years ago | (#32020818)

And this is a plus, how?

Now you can't even plead distance to get out of "fixing" her machine.

Re:Teamviewer is the bane of the computer guy (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32021040)

And this is a plus, how?

Now you can't even plead distance to get out of "fixing" her machine.

Read the subject line! Lol... Think before you type...

Re:Teamviewer is the bane of the computer guy (1)

Trashman (3003) | more than 4 years ago | (#32021676)

This is why I switched to Mac OS (and Linux) at home. No Windows Now when my Windows using family members have issues, I say "I'm sorry but I don't use the product so I can't really help you." My family members are too cheap to spring the $$$ for a Mac.

And now, I'm not "tech support" anymore; which some members of my family have been ungrateful for in the past.

Re:Teamviewer is the bane of the computer guy (1)

Qwavel (733416) | more than 4 years ago | (#32022332)

> My family members are too cheap to spring the $$$ for a Mac.

So everyone is supposed to spring for the most expensive option or you will call them "too cheap"?

Re:Teamviewer is the bane of the computer guy (1)

Trashman (3003) | more than 4 years ago | (#32022650)

No, not everyone. You can buy whatever whatever makes you happy with *your* own money. :-)

I just want to use something that none of them will likely buy (and waste my time about when they have issues.)

Mod parent funny (1)

Chas (5144) | more than 4 years ago | (#32022816)

I've been using TV for a while now. While I don't particularly enjoy "Family Tech Support Guru", this tool has made my job MUCH easier.

The previous tool I used was WebConference.com. While WC.C worked for most of my clients, it didn't always. Plus, for somebody who isn't very computer literate, the install is scary as fuck.

Now all I need my mom to do is start up the program, give me her ID number (in case I don't feel like looking it up and since I don't want to install it to be persistently connected) and boom. A minute later I'm on her machine. Fixin' her stuff.

Now my uncle, whose machine is just a never-ending nightmare...

RDP, NX vs VNC (3, Insightful)

FrenZon (65408) | more than 4 years ago | (#32020264)

I'd be interested to know how good these are at actually doing UI updates - I'm assuming they're all similar in implementation to VNC, which is a shame as you cannot really compare VNC-based systems to the speed of more integrated solutions like RDP and NX.

Logmein ftw! (1)

DRAGONWEEZEL (125809) | more than 4 years ago | (#32020268)

It's free, fully free until you go over 5 lic.

I tried to pay them, and they wouldn't take my $. Great for Friends / family support, and lic costs are pretty reasonable.

Re:Logmein ftw! (1)

socz (1057222) | more than 4 years ago | (#32021726)

What if the client is behind a router/firewall with DHCP? Can you connect to them without them having to configure port forwarding? That seems to be a problem I run into.

I don't need to print (1)

macbiv (1695966) | more than 4 years ago | (#32020288)

but showmypc is a pretty convenient remote help tool. As a plus its easy enough to walk a user through finding and installing. My only problem with it is personal. One time I was telling a female customer who called in to go to "show my pc dot com" but she didn't hear me clearly and took a great deal of offense at the website name I had just given her. Now I feel dirty every time I do remote work.

Remote Assistance/Remote Desktop (2, Insightful)

gad_zuki! (70830) | more than 4 years ago | (#32020292)

They're not free, but you already paid for them when you bought the OS. Granted, you'll need to set up the firewall rule beforehand, but they do everything you need. Control UAC, print, fast over slow connections, etc.

In a pinch, I use crossloop, which is nothing but hamachi+VNC in a neat little package.

Re:Remote Assistance/Remote Desktop (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32020658)

Exactly. Good old fashioned MSTSC.exe will do anything you ever wanted and more besides tabbing/window organization as each one opens in its own window. So having said that, what is the market for 3rd party tools that do the same thing? I never understood it. Even my father uses a third party remoting tool.

Re:Remote Assistance/Remote Desktop (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32020820)

Getting around work-enforced proxies to stream music from your home file-server to your work desktop?

Re:Remote Assistance/Remote Desktop (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32020980)

Moving RDP to port 80 solved the problem for me where I work.

Re:Remote Assistance/Remote Desktop (1)

Spad (470073) | more than 4 years ago | (#32021260)

...will do anything you ever wanted and more besides tabbing/window organization as each one opens in its own window

That's what RDTabs [avianwaves.com] is for - it's a godsend if you're administering lots of Windows servers via RDP.

Re:Remote Assistance/Remote Desktop (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32021916)

If I'm sitting at a Linux (or MAC) station MSTSC.exe doesn't help me very much.

Re:Remote Assistance/Remote Desktop (1)

Spad (470073) | more than 4 years ago | (#32022000)

True, but both have their own RDP clients that you can use.

Re:Remote Assistance/Remote Desktop (2, Insightful)

CannonballHead (842625) | more than 4 years ago | (#32021272)

In a pinch, I use crossloop, which is nothing but hamachi+VNC in a neat little package.

A lot of what people pay for are common/reachable/available tools "in a neat little package." :)

SSH X forwarding for Mac/Windows (3, Interesting)

0racle (667029) | more than 4 years ago | (#32020334)

Honestly, what I would really love to see would be something like SSH X forwarding to run a single remote app from a Mac or WIndows machine. I have a MacBook, it has a 13 inch screen. My Linux desktop at home has a much larger screen. I wish I could just forward individual Cocoa apps the same way you can run remote X apps over SSH and run them on the larger screen without having to hook the monitor, a keyboard and mouse to the Mac.

Re:SSH X forwarding for Mac/Windows (1, Informative)

loufoque (1400831) | more than 4 years ago | (#32020518)

X forwarding over SSH is extremely slow.

Re:SSH X forwarding for Mac/Windows (1)

jedidiah (1196) | more than 4 years ago | (#32020696)

> X forwarding over SSH is extremely slow.

That's what I thought until I used the MacOS VNC server.

The bundled VNC server just doesn't cut it. Is there something else that manages to be usable in terms of the speed and smoothness department?

Re:SSH X forwarding for Mac/Windows (1)

AvitarX (172628) | more than 4 years ago | (#32021432)

VNC is not X forwarding...

Re:SSH X forwarding for Mac/Windows (1)

jedidiah (1196) | more than 4 years ago | (#32022092)

> VNC is not X forwarding...

I didn't say it was.

Although I suspect that X forwarding across a WAN would be faster.

Apple's VNC sucks. It is too sluggish to be usable even on a LAN where X11 can run fast enough remotely to be indistinguishable from a local application.

So is there something on the Mac that sucks less? I would like a usable remote Mac desktop for my other machines.

Re:SSH X forwarding for Mac/Windows (1)

AvitarX (172628) | more than 4 years ago | (#32022550)

I misunderstood, I thought you meant the OS X implementation showed that it was good once you tried it, blaming something like vino/vinagre for the trouble.

I used Chicken of the VNC on Mac's, it worked for my needs, but they were light.

Re:SSH X forwarding for Mac/Windows (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32023090)

Actually, X forwarding over a WAN sucks, because X is very latency sensitive. You need to use something like NX to put a lot more smarts on each end of the network link, not only to compress some bloated payload but to replicate the display state model and allow the application and user display to run ahead from locally-held information (no round-trip delays adding up in complex screen updates.)

Re:SSH X forwarding for Mac/Windows (1)

FlyingBishop (1293238) | more than 4 years ago | (#32020740)

Only as slow as your connection.

And the point is "slow" is relative. It's very fast compared to remote desktop solutions.

Re:SSH X forwarding for Mac/Windows (2, Informative)

bemymonkey (1244086) | more than 4 years ago | (#32020826)

I just use Remote Desktop... resizes windows for smaller-than-host screens automatically.

Now on a Mac, no idea...

Re:SSH X forwarding for Mac/Windows (1)

Spad (470073) | more than 4 years ago | (#32020928)

It's doable with RDP and Server 2008/Server 2008 R2 using Terminal Services RemoteApp - it's not quite the same as X forwarding, but it works pretty well for most things where you don't need a full desktop environment.

bad chart (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32020336)

The chart on the first page has a useless column -- he groups the host and client support together when these should be two separate columns. For instance, Microsoft's RDC says "Windows and Mac", when in reality the host is Windows only and the client runs on Windows and Mac. Not being too familiar with the other options, I'm sure there are other combinations like this that will be deal breakers for others out there.

"Free" as in beer not speech...well a sample at k (1)

mx2street (1148657) | more than 4 years ago | (#32020412)

Forget about the "free" tools in the article and get Tunnelier [http://www.bitvise.com/tunnelier]

UltraVNC - Single Click (4, Interesting)

ka9dgx (72702) | more than 4 years ago | (#32020480)

I highly recommend using UltraVNC-SC [uvnc.com] . You configure it for your needs as a support person. The person you support has to run a small single EXE file, and you then have control over their machine. Quick and efficient access to someone's desktop to see what they see has made a vast improvement in my ability to support people for the past 5 years or so.

Re:UltraVNC - Single Click (3, Informative)

ducomputergeek (595742) | more than 4 years ago | (#32021658)

The only problem is that it's windows only. There is no UltraVNC SC for Mac/Linux users.

Also, if your dealing with a shop that has to be PCI-DSS or as part of a PA-DSS application, the PCI folks want to see at least 256bit AES encryption. The 128-bit solution isn't enough. So far the closest we've found is Logmein and we only support clients on Windows or OSX.

But we're looking at an NX based solution to deploy later this year or early next year which will allow us to do remote administration/maintenance for Windows, OSX, and Linux boxes.

Re:UltraVNC - Single Click (2, Informative)

speeDDemon (nw) (643987) | more than 4 years ago | (#32022904)

I love UltraVNC-SC, however since vista (and now including win7) it has become less usable. I believe it has difficulty handling the '3D' desktop, specifically the UAC that causes the screen to darken.

I didn't realize I wasn't serious (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32020524)

I didn't know that printing was the bar for whether you're doing serious work. What, is he another shill [slashdot.org] for the paper industry?

Re:I didn't realize I wasn't serious (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32021000)

Yes, that was a bit conceited to word it that way.
When I work from home using a VPN and putty it sure seems like serious work to me.

There is support for Mac Remote Desktop (3, Interesting)

www.sorehands.com (142825) | more than 4 years ago | (#32020608)

They talk about RDP for Mac, but they are only talking about the client. There is a
beta version of Mac Remote Desktop that allows an RDP client to connect to a Mac.

It is called Mac Remote Desktop (surprised?) There is some information about it at http://www.aquaconnect.net/mac-remote-desktop.php [aquaconnect.net]

Aqua Connect also has a version for Mac Server, called Aqua Connect Terminal Server. More information is at http://www.aquaconnect.net/ [aquaconnect.net]

Re:There is support for Mac Remote Desktop (1, Informative)

ducomputergeek (595742) | more than 4 years ago | (#32021326)

Or you can go into system preferences>sharing>screen sharing and use VNC. It's built in. Hell, you can do it through iChat. And then you have Apple Remote Desktop which allows for some more advanced options and it's $500 to support an unlimited number of macs.

We've been exploring this for a while, but we have to make sure any solutions meet PCI-DSS and PA-DSS compliance. That really leaves us with Logmein as the only way to support both Windows and Mac clients behind a firewall on our budget.

Re:There is support for Mac Remote Desktop (1)

Bryan3000000 (1356999) | more than 4 years ago | (#32022246)

Before you spring for Apple Remote Desktop, make sure you understand what you're getting. I'm not sure if I'd call it misnamed, but it provides extremely little in the way of what you would actually call "remote desktop" functionality. The screen sharing it uses is equal to what is built-in - it's just vnc. It does allow you to curtain the remote machine, but that doesn't work well...at all.

Apple Remote Desktop is NOT in any way a terminal server product. Aquaconnect does that. To some extent, Vine Server (which is just VNC) will provide that as well (if you use Vine Server and Vine VNC client, you can log in multiple desktop sessions on a single machine simultaneously).

Apple Remote Desktop is a product aimed at _managing_ computers on your network, and maybe providing help desk support. It has reporting features, so that info on all clients can be regularly obtained. It also allows you to push applications, run installers, and run scripts on a bunch of remote Macs. Frankly though, they need to be on your LAN for it to work really well, though it does work over the internet if you have a static IP address for the remote machine. In combination with OS X server (for policy settings), you can have pretty good control of desktops on your network.

Re:There is support for Mac Remote Desktop (1)

znerk (1162519) | more than 4 years ago | (#32021686)

It is called Mac Remote Desktop (surprised?)

Yes, I am. I would have expected it to be called iRDP.

My open source remote desktop code (1, Interesting)

QuickBible (1143641) | more than 4 years ago | (#32020618)

I have a free, open source remote desktop system for Windows XP and above. It is written in C++ using MFC and the MDI interface. It supports multiple sessions and the client supports multiple server connections. It is stable but light on the features. It is my hobby project. It would be great if some other coders could help me flesh out the features. If any windows programmer is interested, you can find the source code and executables on codeproject. Here is the link http://www.codeproject.com/KB/IP/remotecontrol.aspx [codeproject.com]

What is "Printing?" (1, Insightful)

crow (16139) | more than 4 years ago | (#32020646)

Isn't printing something people did back in the 80s? Why would anyone want to do that now? Even in a corporate environment, I only need to actually print something about once a month.

Re:What is "Printing?" (1)

FlyingBishop (1293238) | more than 4 years ago | (#32020786)

Tell that to my boss.

Re:What is "Printing?" (1)

peragrin (659227) | more than 4 years ago | (#32021532)

And the same is true for me(I threw out my last printer almost a decade ago).

However at work some people must have hard copies. I finally figured out why recently. While you can multitask with any OS now but the monitors generally can only display ONE app at a time. even with widescreen monitors the majority of which have resolutions which really only allow decent reading of one document at a time. Which means if your reading from one or more sources, and compiling them on a third document you are constantly task switching back and forth which slows you down, You can stretch multiple documents out on your desk and glance at them to gather information as you type. Something that is only really possible with 2-3 monitors on computers.

At home I have 3 monitors and a TV which my computers can output on. however most people at work only get one monitor, two if they are lucky. Try working with just one piece of paper in front of you and stack all other work objects behind it. doesn't work so well does it?

The solution is either high resolution monitors(tough to find and expensive or multiple 1280x 1024 displays.

Re:What is "Printing?" (1)

basscomm (122302) | more than 4 years ago | (#32021900)

And the same is true for me(I threw out my last printer almost a decade ago).

However at work some people must have hard copies. I finally figured out why recently. While you can multitask with any OS now but the monitors generally can only display ONE app at a time. even with widescreen monitors the majority of which have resolutions which really only allow decent reading of one document at a time. Which means if your reading from one or more sources, and compiling them on a third document you are constantly task switching back and forth which slows you down, You can stretch multiple documents out on your desk and glance at them to gather information as you type. Something that is only really possible with 2-3 monitors on computers.

At home I have 3 monitors and a TV which my computers can output on. however most people at work only get one monitor, two if they are lucky. Try working with just one piece of paper in front of you and stack all other work objects behind it. doesn't work so well does it?

The solution is either high resolution monitors(tough to find and expensive or multiple 1280x 1024 displays.

We frequently use printers at work for printing work requests for computers that customers bring in. When they pick them up, we have them sign the timesheets/bills and then go from there. We tried having them sign our monitors, but those were really hard to file.

ssh + tightVNC, or ssh + RDP (2, Informative)

ground.zero.612 (1563557) | more than 4 years ago | (#32020656)

I need a little encryption so I tunnel tightVNC or RDP through ssh. I find VNC to be a tad glitchy, especially drawing GTK windows, but it has a convenient full screen refresh function that overcomes that. RDP has the advantage of connecting the remote pc to local printers.

Missing: Obvious Windows Remote Access Tools (4, Funny)

Nova Express (100383) | more than 4 years ago | (#32020692)

This article seems to be missing some of the most common, well-known remote access tools for Windows:

  • Storm
  • Conficker
  • GUMBLAR
  • Renos
  • etc.

These are just a few of the very common tools used to remotely access Windows systems every day!

Re:Missing: Obvious Windows Remote Access Tools (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32021176)

I agree; where's metasploit for that matter? Few things beat a meterpreter shell for remote system management.

Re:Missing: Obvious Windows Remote Access Tools (1)

StikyPad (445176) | more than 4 years ago | (#32021778)

Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.

lcock (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32020746)

Ja7a IRC cli9ent

Very Deep Evaluation (1)

spydabyte (1032538) | more than 4 years ago | (#32020838)

His evaluation of all of these products is incredibly insightful. "Firewall friendly"? He means: "Can it get around firewalls without changing their settings properly?" Never mind the security issue of opening your desktop / server / whatever to a third party using something like LogMeIn.Thanks, Keith!

Re:Very Deep Evaluation (2, Informative)

Dynedain (141758) | more than 4 years ago | (#32021456)

That's why I setup my mother with iChat. She can initialize a remote desktop sharing without needing to modify any settings or her or my router, and neither of us needs to worry about dynamic IP addresses.

Re:Very Deep Evaluation (2, Funny)

beakerMeep (716990) | more than 4 years ago | (#32021582)

Who cares about security if you can remote print? Doesn't everyone consider printing to a location they aren't at a top priority?

I know when I need a document on paper, and I need it now, I print to somewhere else.

Mac + Windows x64 (1)

AnonymousDot (517935) | more than 4 years ago | (#32020904)

= LogMeIn + Dropbox. What else? Weave on Firefox. That's it.

VNC Single Click (1)

bjs555 (889176) | more than 4 years ago | (#32021048)

The review states that VNC isn't firewall friendly but, apparently, the reviewer isn't aware of the single click versions of VNC. These versions run without any changes to the host firewall since the connection is initiated by the host. The single click version of UltraVNC is available at:
http://www.uvnc.com/addons/singleclick.html [uvnc.com]

No proxy support (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32021080)

GBridge was listed as excellent, but if you work at a company that has a proxy server, you are out of luck. GBridge entries in the forum have been saying "we're working on it" since July of 2008.

SSH+RDP (2, Informative)

Spad (470073) | more than 4 years ago | (#32021100)

I use a combination of copSSH [itefix.no] , an excellent OpenSSH package for Windows, port forwarding and good old RDP (Because I don't really like the idea of publishing my RDP connection out on t'internet when I can use Public Key auth with SSH). Plus using SSH gives me SCP for file transfers, which is usually a bit faster than doing it via redirected drives in Windows.

The Windows 7/2008 R2 version of Remote Desktop (v7) has full support for multiple monitors (finally), Aero and for streaming audio and video via WMP so watching stuff is less of a slideshow (though still not really great with your average home broadband upload speeds) as well as local resource mapping (printers, drives, smartcards, etc).

Re:SSH+RDP (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32022336)

Ahhh, video and smart cards. Over remote desktop the local card reader just disappears, so I cannot really watch any encrypted satellite channels. Great combination.

"Screen Sharing" for the Mac (3, Informative)

Concerned Onlooker (473481) | more than 4 years ago | (#32021118)

For those Mac users connecting to another Mac there is always the "Screen Sharing" app located at /System/Library/CoreServices/. It's already there. It's free.

Re:"Screen Sharing" for the Mac (2, Informative)

Dynedain (141758) | more than 4 years ago | (#32021506)

For those Mac users connecting to another Mac there is always the "Screen Sharing" app located at /System/Library/CoreServices/. It's already there. It's free.

Not only that, but it's VNC based, so any VNC client can connect to a Mac that has screensharing enabled, and you can use it to connect to any VNC server.

Oh, and you don't have to dig into the library to find it either.... from the Finder, do connect to server, and give it a vnc url, vnc://machine.example.com

Re:"Screen Sharing" for the Mac (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32021752)

Yes, screen sharing works fine. If you are connected through a router, you might have to forward port 5900 to the machine you want to VNC to. Then on the other Mac you just need a free VNC client, like Jollys FastVNC. Set the client attribute to "Mac" and you are good to go. I use this all the time.

Depends on situation. (1)

carp3_noct3m (1185697) | more than 4 years ago | (#32021130)

I have used and tested multiple remote software, some commercial licensed stuff as well. I find that first, it depends on what you are using it for. If you are a remote worker and want to use programs at work from home, or vice versa, the minor trouble of editing ACL's to allow RDP (don't forget to change the port to avoid scans) is worth it. On the other hand, if you are constantly dealing with multiple people behind firewalls, something like show my pc or logmein free is more than likely what you want. I particularly like RDP for a couple reasons, one being that its built in and requires no additional installation on any professional version of windows. RDP for graphical remote on windows, GUI over SSH for *nix.

RDP rocks (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32021562)

There really is no contest when it comes to remote access for windows. RDP is the most bandwidth effecient performant and feature rich client of the age-old citrix fame. Integrated session encryption keyed to your login credentials is HUGE for vista/2008.. Something that was not even mentioned. How do you review remote access technology and not comment about security?

On the unix side SSH and family rocks of course. VNC is good for GUI but still does not hold a candle to RDP in terms of a performant solution.

I know the FA is about Win/Mac, how about Linux? (1)

Thagg (9904) | more than 4 years ago | (#32021642)

I'd love to do remote desktop viewing for distributed, Linux-based, artistic productions. For HP machines their proprietary Remote Graphics Software [hp.com] is very nice, and fills the bill perfectly, but it does require you to use HP boxes (at least for the server, if not necessarily the viewer). Are there any other open-source or widely-available proprietary desktop sharing systems for Linux?

In the UK, the point is fairly moot... (1)

pandrijeczko (588093) | more than 4 years ago | (#32021678)

...since very few people over here own Macs.

I'm still waiting... (1)

CondeZer0 (158969) | more than 4 years ago | (#32021760)

For any other system to provide something as elegant and convenient as Plan 9's cpu(1) command [cat-v.org] .

Re:I'm still waiting... (1)

Blakey Rat (99501) | more than 4 years ago | (#32023022)

NAME
                    cpu - connection to CPU server

          SYNOPSIS
                    cpu [ -h server ] [ -u user ] [ -a auth-method ] [ -P
                    patternfile ] [ -e encryption-hash-algs ] [ -k keypattern ]
                    [ -c cmd args ... ]

                    cpu [ -R | -O ]

          DESCRIPTION
                    Cpu starts an rc(1) running on the server machine, or the
                    machine named in the $cpu environment variable if there is
                    no -h option. Rc's standard input, output, and error files
                    will be /dev/cons in the name space where the cpu command
                    was invoked. Normally, cpu is run in an rio(1) window on a
                    terminal, so rc output goes to that window, and input comes
                    from the keyboard when that window is current. Rc's current
                    directory is the working directory of the cpu command
                    itself.

It just goes on and on like this. What does it actuallydo!?

Dreadful Article (1)

Spad (470073) | more than 4 years ago | (#32021834)

Their RDP "download" link goes here [microsoft.com] to a 3 year old version of the RDP client for XP. Given the massive improvements between v5.1 and the current version in Windows 7 (v7) it makes me wonder about the validity of their testing if they really used that version and the validity of their writers if they didn't.

Printing is a deal breaker (1)

interval1066 (668936) | more than 4 years ago | (#32021854)

I'm sure there's varying degrees to this, as everything else and everyone's needs are different, but as time marches on I've been finding my need to print things has become less and less urgent. Am I alone?

Re:Printing is a deal breaker (1)

DigiShaman (671371) | more than 4 years ago | (#32022640)

In Windows, you can't print to a USB printer through an RDP session by default. For that, you need to follow Microsoft's KB 302361 article to enable it via registry. It's really simple. Below is the link.

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/302361 [microsoft.com]

Lower Level (1)

StikyPad (445176) | more than 4 years ago | (#32021894)

On a related note, is there anything to enable low-level remote access? Something like Dell DRAC, so that you can actually change BIOS settings and the like? Sometimes I need to reboot Windows remotely, which isn't the default OS, and I can't access the boot manager configuration from Windows. I imagine something like that would be difficult to implement in software, and obviously a software solution would be impossible to use if the machine is off, so I don't really care if it's third-party hardware as long as I don't have to buy a Dell server.

Re:Lower Level (1)

jspenguin1 (883588) | more than 4 years ago | (#32022322)

A lot of servers have this built-in. On Sun servers, there is a separate service processor (an ARM running embedded Linux) that can power the server on/off, provides network access to video/keyboard, and can create a virtual USB DVD drive.

There are also external boxes that will do the same thing. We use several of these [raritan.com] where I work.

Re:Lower Level (1)

tallmega (1521423) | more than 4 years ago | (#32022848)

For desktops, see Intel AMT and Vpro technologies. They allow console redirection over lan, and the chips come on most newer desktop lines (such as Dell's Optiplex). Its fairly recent though, and many companies dont have the infrastructure in place yet. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Active_Management_Technology [wikipedia.org]

iChat (1)

coaxial (28297) | more than 4 years ago | (#32022238)

My parents live 2000 miles away. If there's something wrong I just say "Buddies | Ask to Share Remote Screen" and walla, everything works. Best part? My parents already run iChat.

While not perfect for every case, it's perfect when you're the family IT guy.

Missing remote access tool (1)

FirstTimeCaller (521493) | more than 4 years ago | (#32022460)

Microsoft recently "released" Mesh [live.com] . It is IE only though (and the reason I will probably stick with LogMeIn).

ssh (1)

gatkinso (15975) | more than 4 years ago | (#32023742)

Does just about everything I need. I did stand up an OpenVPN-AS for the rest of the herd - they seem to like it.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?