ScreenConnect?
-
@pete-s said in ScreenConnect?:
@scottalanmiller said in ScreenConnect?:
SC is the most powerful, reliable, and lowest cost tool of its kind that I've used. Not that it is ground breaking so worlds better, it's just the best one that I've used thus far. The cost is a bit lower than most, at least on our grandfathered plan, and it does everything that we need and basically nothing that we don't.
So what's the primary use case, remote assistance/support?
Yes. For us specifically, the big use is the permanently installed agent, not ad hoc consumer support. This let's us work on machines, and issue remote commands, unattended.
-
We just moved to SC from another vendor. It's a stupid simple setup and does exactly what it says on the tin. Pricing was significantly less then the previous vendor but in line with other competition we looked at.
-
@scottalanmiller said in ScreenConnect?:
The cost is a bit lower than most, at least on our grandfathered plan,
The new cost is not bad either. They totally changed allowances. Had they not done that, it would be not worth it.
-
Haven't really used to many tools to compare but the ability to send remote commands via cmd or power shell in Screen Connect is just so great. You can do so many things without the user getting interrupted or even knowing. Combine it with chocolatey and it's even better.
-
@romo said in ScreenConnect?:
Haven't really used to many tools to compare but the ability to send remote commands via cmd or power shell in Screen Connect is just so great. You can do so many things without the user getting interrupted or even knowing. Combine it with chocolatey and it's even better.
I am using Bomgar and it does not allow you to use PowerShell for sure... or scripts for that matter.
-
@dbeato said in ScreenConnect?:
@romo said in ScreenConnect?:
Haven't really used to many tools to compare but the ability to send remote commands via cmd or power shell in Screen Connect is just so great. You can do so many things without the user getting interrupted or even knowing. Combine it with chocolatey and it's even better.
I am using Bomgar and it does not allow you to use PowerShell for sure... or scripts for that matter.
Is that due to the plan? Thought Bomgar even had a remote shell.
-
@romo said in ScreenConnect?:
@dbeato said in ScreenConnect?:
@romo said in ScreenConnect?:
Haven't really used to many tools to compare but the ability to send remote commands via cmd or power shell in Screen Connect is just so great. You can do so many things without the user getting interrupted or even knowing. Combine it with chocolatey and it's even better.
I am using Bomgar and it does not allow you to use PowerShell for sure... or scripts for that matter.
Is that due to the plan? Thought Bomgar even had a remote shell.
We have Bomgar inhouse and it does have Command Shell and then you can do powershell. Just you don't have a separate shell for it.
-
And you can also run canned scripts too.
-
@dbeato said in ScreenConnect?:
And you can also run canned scripts too.
And also you can run a Web Console too.
-
@dbeato well remote shell is much better than just having the chance to send the commands for some stuff.
Can you do multi shell/commands via the shell to several computers at once?
-
@dbeato said in ScreenConnect?:
And you can also run canned scripts too.
Canned scripts would be great to have
-
@romo said in ScreenConnect?:
@dbeato said in ScreenConnect?:
And you can also run canned scripts too.
Canned scripts would be great to have
ScreenConnect has canned scripts. @gjacobse used them a lot.
-
+1 on ScreenConnect being awesome. Here are my top five:
- allows support to remote in to a client user's machine in under five seconds
- can configure users as support agents with limited rights such that they can only log in to their own computer. Handy for those who occasionally need to remote their computer, either from home or elsewhere.
- Android and iPhone/Pad apps.
- customizable to your company look/feel including colors & logos
- ad-hoc remote sessions with emailed invitations for systems that do not have a client installed
The version I use requires a small client (<2 MB) installed on the controlling machine, though all access is through a web browser.
