Comparing MeshCentral 2 to ScreenConnect
-
No issues with Windows Defender
-
Doing some side by side testing against SC and MC is blowing its doors off in performance. Both the interface performance and remote session performance!
-
The features are already brilliant and it's still in Beta...defiantly could be a viable solution, after all SC is not exactly a low cost product.
-
@StuartJordan said in Comparing MeshCentral 2 to ScreenConnect:
Yep just tried it on a win7 vm, Kaspersky goes nuts lol...
Annoying will have to exclude manually.
I seem to hit something similar with Trend but it doesn't give any warnings or logs that I could find, just allows the install to continue but it sits broken and unusable
-
@Ylian is out for the holidays. So expect no updates for a few days.
-
Finally got around to putting LetsEncrypt certs on my MC install
-
@StuartJordan said in Comparing MeshCentral 2 to ScreenConnect:
Kaspersky
I asked to be whitelisted by Kaspersky a few months back and they approved. I will need to check that again.
We have our own WebRTC stack in the MeshAgent which is quite unique. However, Firefox v64 just broke it (Looking into it), Chrome works. With WebRTC traffic goes directly from the browser to the agent bypassing the server. Should be faster, scale better and lower hosting costs.
Yes, I am traveling for the next 5 days, will be back with updates soon. Got plenty to work on.
Ylian
-
I need to test MC with Sophos.
-
@Ylian said in Comparing MeshCentral 2 to ScreenConnect:
We have our own WebRTC stack in the MeshAgent which is quite unique. However, Firefox v64 just broke it (Looking into it), Chrome works. With WebRTC traffic goes directly from the browser to the agent bypassing the server. Should be faster, scale better and lower hosting costs.
Yes, we use that here and it's SCREAMING fast!!
-
@scottalanmiller Are using Ubuntu current or LTS?
-
@black3dynamite said in Comparing MeshCentral 2 to ScreenConnect:
@scottalanmiller Are using Ubuntu current or LTS?
Current
-
I'm getting an error trying to setup LE:
MeshCentral HTTP redirection web server running on port 81. ERROR: Redirection web server must be active on port 80 for Let's Encrypt to work. MeshCentral v0.2.5-d, WAN mode. MeshCentral HTTPS web server running on control.meshexample.com:444.My config.json:
"settings": { "MongoDb": "mongodb://127.0.0.1:27017/meshcentral", "MongoDbCol": "meshcentral", "WANonly": true, "_LANonly": true, "_Minify": 1, "_SessionTime": 30, "_SessionKey": "MyReallySecretPassword", "_Port": 443, "RedirPort": 80, -
No proxy in front of it, right?
-
Have you tried it with no RedirPort setting at all? I have nothing set and it works fine. 80 is the default.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Comparing MeshCentral 2 to ScreenConnect:
No proxy in front of it, right?
No proxy.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Comparing MeshCentral 2 to ScreenConnect:
Have you tried it with no RedirPort setting at all? I have nothing set and it works fine. 80 is the default.
You mean, try like this?
"_RedirPort": 80,Either way, I get the same error.
-
@StuartJordan Self hosted SC is not horribly priced. Not as good as it used to be. But still a viable price.
Hosted is similar to other hosted solutions I believe. And is certainly higher than I would prefer.
I have legacy pricing for SC self hosted, so really hard to get better.
MC2 seems to actually do it.
-
Email works for now using Ubuntu Server 18.10 live installer. Does nodemailer requires packages that is not included with a minimal install of Fedora?
-
@black3dynamite said in Comparing MeshCentral 2 to ScreenConnect:
Email works for now using Ubuntu Server 18.10 live installer. Does nodemailer requires packages that is not included with a minimal install of Fedora?
Not sure, but unlikely.
-
Don't have the invite link on my install, I'm using the latest version apparently as well, any ideas?
