Hey,

I was told that procedure was easy.

I have a dsl modem attached to a 10 port switch. There are three machines plugged in, all able to go online with 100.0 Mbps.
I wanted to remote desktop to one of the machines to another, was told that "all" I needed was the IP-address of the machine that i am trying to connect to, and to put a check mark in the box next to
"allow users to connect remotely to this computer". NO-GO, do I need to set a password and user name???, and if i do where do I do that???. I ask becuase none of the three machines are password protected.

What's Missing??

Remote Desktop Connection is a pain to set up, believe me. FOR NOW ONLY, turn your Firewall off. Try it again, and if it works, then you can turn it back on and allow the port that Remote Desktop uses to remain open.

Another thing you could try, is use UltraVNC. It's freeware, it's open source, it's easy to use, secure, and works well for me.

Check it out at:

http://www.ultravnc.com

I believe in the Big Bang. God said it, and BANG it happened!

RDC is a better bet than VNC unless you are using Real (or another VNC) with encryption. RDC uses encryption and most VNC sessions do not.

I am assuming that since you have multiple computers behind one router that you have Network Address Translation going on somewhere (i.e something translating the external IP to an internal IP). Most likely this is your router.

You can run CMD and do "ipconfig" to find the IP address of your local computer and also the IP address of the "gateway". This gateway (again most likely your modem/router) is usually the device doing the IP translation. You then have to configure your NAT so that the external IP and Port points to an internal IP and port of the desired computer.

For example say your external IP is 66.x.x.10 (x can be any number) and your internal IP is 192.168.1.10 YOu need to point 66.x.x.10 Port 3389 (default port for RDC) to 192.168.1.10 Port 3389

If you have set that up correctly and you are unable to RDC then try pingin the external IP. If it is being blocked then you have a firewall/router that is blocking it somewhere.

Post back, or email me and I will be glad to help you out some more with this.

Additionally for added security you can change the default port for RDC to something else just to make it a little less obvious to the outside world.

I can give you directions on that as well if you are intested.

l8r

Michael

RWD1996 does not like RDP for some unknown reason and that is his/her opinion.

I personally find RDP to be just about the same as any third party RDP client and it is already built in/installed. Additionally, you don't have to turn off Windows Firewall to use it.

Right click on My Computer and select Properties, go to the Remote tab, place a check next to Allow users to remotely connect to this computer.
Click on Select Remote Users button.

Then Click on Add, type the user's name in the box, click on Check Name and then click Ok.

Each user will have to have a User Account with a password on the PC that they are wanting to remote control.
For example: Only users that already have a User Account will be found in the Check Names box.

To add new users go to Control Panel, User Accounts.

Windows Firewall will be automatically configured to allow remote connections.

HTH
Bryan

shoot.. sorry I didn't read your first post thuroughly enough.

"YES" with RDC you can only access a password protected account. All non-password protected accounts will not be available for the remote connection.

Additionally if you are still having problems with this please let us know if you are trying to RDC within your network or from the outside. If you are tryin to remote from the outside world then my previous post about the firewall/routing rules would still apply. Otherwise you should be able to just use the internal IP address when connecting to a computer within the network. Once "connected" there is a login box that you will be able to enter the appropriate user and password to login.

Please let me know if you have any other questions.

Thanks.

Michael

I (a he, by the way), don't like RDP for the following reasons:

A Windows XP Pro, Server 2003, or an Advanced Server computer is required to be the host; a Windows 95/98/98SE/2000Pro/XP Home cannot be the host. With UltraVNC, any machine running the above OSes can be the host.

There must be a whole lot of things to set up; As trdj says, you have to "configure your NAT so that the external IP and Port points to an internal IP and port of the desired computer." With a program such as UltraVNC, all you have to do is enter the IP Address, that's it!

My final reason is that for someone that has used a VNC app for a long time, (like me) and decides to change to RDP, the dialog gets confusing because all of a sudden you have to enter a user name and password. People who see that wonder "What is the user name and password for? Where do I get that from??" A perfect example of someone who asks that is the OP when he/she says:

"do I need to set a password and user name???, and if i do where do I do that???." I ask becuase none of the three machines are password protected. This is the same question I asked myself when I first tried to use it.

"RDC is a better bet than VNC unless you are using Real (or another VNC) with encryption. RDC uses encryption and most VNC sessions do not."

UltraVNC does use encryption. That's why I recommend it.

I should have remembered that the Firewall automatically allows RDP to go through it. My bad.

So there you go. That's why I disagree with using RDP. The choice is yours to disagree/agree with me.

I believe in the Big Bang. God said it, and BANG it happened!

sorry I didn't realize you were using an encrypted vnc connection. encrypted VNC is always a better option than non-encrypted, but in terms of using VNC vs. RDP (not to argue anything since you raise excellent points) this is what I offer so that other users can make their own determination.

VNC Pros-
As mentioned - Installs on any OS to act as host. Fairly light install in terms of apps and extremely functional
Multiple remote sessions at the same time.
Easy if install and usage as pointed out
Also is cross-browser/platform compatable.

VNC Cons -
Most are NOT encrypted which can be dangerous, others still have to have the added encryption ability installed on top of the client, making it not so obvious to the newbie
Doesn't lock the remote screen leaving it open for other users to see your work on the remote PC
Uses more processor (in an active session) than RDC (RDC is more integrated with the Windows OS).

RDC Pros -
Already installed and integrated with the OS so consumes less processor resources.
Client can easily be installed on other non-xp systems (but only on windows system, not cross platform friendly)
More stable than VNC (VNC servers tend to crash quite a bit more in my exp and I am constantly re-starting the services).
Encrypted Connection by default
Locks the remote PC screen
Is also a Terminal Server Client that can access Win 2000/2003 Servers quite readily.
Can easily change the connection port (through registry hack).
Can be tweaked/hacked to allow multiple concurrent connection under different user accounts.

RDC Cons -
Locks the remote PC Sreen. This is a con if you are wanting to use RDC to show/train someone remotely.
Is somewhat harder to configure and use (though NAT is still an issue with VNC as it is RDC, ie. you can't just access an internal IP on VNC if you are remoting from the outside).
As mentioned can only be used on XP Pro / 2003 boxes as host.

Don't get me wrong I love VNC and use it on a regular basis. My typical setup in a client's office is to have one box set up that I remote into with RDC and from that box VNC to all the other clients on the network (therefore keeping my VNC connection behind the firewall). They both have their place in the remote admin world and should be carefully considered depending on their usage and the user.

also FYI (good nugget to remember), an RDC user (logged in) can still be viewed via VNC if there is also a VNC server installed on the host computer the RDC user is logged into. This allows you to view what a remote user is doing via RDC even when the screen on the remote computer (host) is locked! Awesome trick I used to keep tabs on remote users working on my network.

Anywho great info in all the posts above and thanks for posting back RWD, I am so glad you cleared up the gender question! ;-)

Peace!

Michael

I'm glad you cleared up my question on whether I raised good points or not. But truly, that's why I don't like RDC.

Anyway, God Bless!

Rayburn

I believe in the Big Bang. God said it, and BANG it happened!

"There must be a whole lot of things to set up; As trdj says, you have to "configure your NAT so that the external IP and Port points to an internal IP and port of the desired computer." With a program such as UltraVNC, all you have to do is enter the IP Address, that's it!"

And, if you are trying to connect to your computer from outside the network, how are you going to put in the IP of the computer you are trying to connect to since it uses a private IP? You would need to enter the IP of your router and still do the port forwarding as stated above.

Michael J

sorry I think the whole IP and Port forwarding debate is my fault. I was just re-reading the posts and wanted to clear up some mis-information/assumptions on my part:

KyeTech posted: "...I wanted to remote desktop to one of the machines to another..."

I misunderstood this and assumed you were trying to remote from the outside world. But if you meant that you wanted to remote desktop internally within your network then my information on routing the external IP and port to internal IP and port is not necessary. both computers should be on an internal IP schema and as long as you have followed the steps that Bryco mentions for enabling remote users (and ensure that accounts you are trying ot use have a password) then you should be able to Remote Connect to the other computer either by its internal IP address or computer name. Also as mentioned above Windows Firewall should have the allowance for "Remote Desktop" (in the Exceptions tab) checked/allowed by default but you can always double-check this to make sure. Any additional firewalls should be set up to allow this as well. Additionally Norton Antivirus 2005/2006 has an Internet Worm Detection that will prevent RDC and must be turned off.

Rayburn is correct in that if using internally within a network "IP address is all that is needed for VNC" just as Michael J is correct in that you would need to IP and Port forward if using VNC from outside the network. In terms of IP address and Port forwarding the same would be true for either VNC/RDC from either within/outside the network.

KyeTech - Sorry if this thread got to convoluted/confusing. If you have any questions feel free to email me directly and I can walk you through the entire setup and/or troubleshooting if you are not making a successful connection.

L8r!

Michael

It's part way my fault too, I'll admit. I gave a wrong example of having to prepare the Server computer before attempting to connect to it. I meant to say that you have to make sure your computer is allowed to accept remote connections, but with UltraVNC, it's allowed by default -- you don't have to do anything extra. And if you use UltraVNC, and don't want to accept incoming connections, all you have to do is have the firewall block the port in which UltraVNC monitors for incoming connections.

I believe in the Big Bang. God said it, and BANG it happened!

hehe... have to post this... probably a much easier way for someone to figure out how to set up RDC than trying to read this post! ;)

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/using/mobility/getstarted/remoteintro.mspx

of coarse this post still has some great food for thought on RDC vs. VNC :-P

I agree, trdj!

I believe in the Big Bang. God said it, and BANG it happened!

RWD1996,

I agree also that there is some good info here, but your first statement is bound to create conflict "Remote Desktop Connection is a pain to set up, believe me".

I'm sorry but, I don't find that to be the case. All I have to do to enable RD is to place a checkmark in the appropriate box. I don't need to install any software and it will be automatically configured in the Windows's firewall.

That's not to say that RD is the end-all be-all of terminal serevices. It's biggest disadvantage is that it is only available with XP Pro or 2003. In those cases RD is not even an option.

Michael J

Just to add (this may not be commonly known). Although the "HOST" can only be an XP Pro or 2003 box, the client can be installed on any Win OS and downloaded separately from Microsoft's web site here:

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/pro/downloads/rdclientdl.asp

Additionally an advantage to RDC that I failed to mention previously is that RDC seems to handle full screen viewing much better than VNC in most cases. I have had instances with VNC that when trying to go Full Screen, the window either did not go to a true full screen, or when it did the dimensions of the desktop were skewed/stretched/pixelated (Used Tight, Real & Ultra). I know that this is mainly because of the odd pixel setting I have my local monitors on, but still RDC seems to re-render the screen of the remote desktop according to my monitors. Additionally the way to end a Full Screen viewing on VNC (Esc + Right-Click on the Taskbar + Exit) is a little clumpier than RDC. With RDC you simply scroll up to the pin-up bar and close/minimize.

One other important factor (and probably the MOST) for others to know is that the VNC code/programming is open source and so there are a LOT of different versions of VNC out there... a lot of which may not be all that secure or stable (services/clients crash, etc.) When making your decision to use VNC please get one of the better providors (Ultra, Real, Tight, etc.) and make sure it's a VNC client with encryption otherwise you compromise the security of any data used in a remote session.

Good thread and Good info here! Thanks all!

Michael

There is also a Remote Desktop client for the MAC!

Michael J

Well, I've never had problems with full screen viewing. It's always worked excellent for me. The problem you could have had with it being stretched and all of that could of been because you were working in 2 different resolutions (like you just said).

What I mean by RDC being "hard to use, believe me" is that for a first time user, (like what I assumed about the OP) it would be hard to use. Let me explain further,

Take me for example....When I first learned to use RDC, I thought that either Home or Pro was capable of being used as a host, it never said anything about Remote Desktop Connection being a client only application when running on XP Home and under, and that the actual host software is embedded into XP Pro, 2000 Server, Server 2003, and Advanced Server; I thought I could hook up a Windows XP Home and Windows 2000 Pro computer together, with the XP Home computer being the host.

So I tried that; I popped in the XP CD, and installed Remote Desktop Connection on the Windows 2000 Pro machine. But when I tried that, it wouldn't work! I messed with every setting I could think of. I read the offline documentation for RDC, and I don't recall it saying anything about requiring an XP Pro, 2000 Server, Server 2003, or Advanced Server to be the host. Being baffled on why it wouldn't work, I gave up after trying for 40 minutes. A few weeks later, I tried TightVNC, and bingo! To me that's unprofessionalism on Microsoft's part to not put the important fact into their offline documentation, that a more advanced OS such as XP Pro is needed as the host. They had to put the information online only. This makes the first time user have to go through the hassle of going online and finding out why it won't work after looking in the offline documentation and finding nothing! You see, one of the most important things that should be clear to a user when using RDC was left out of the offline documentation, which in turn, makes RDC hard to use at first!

Anyway, after not being able to get RDC to work, I searched the included offline documentation, and found an RDC Troubleshooting wizard. It asked me to choose what the error message was, and I selected it. The only thing it told me to do was to make sure Remote Desktop invites were enabled. It never said 1 thing about having to have one of the more advanced OSes to be the host!

Of course you have to download VNC apps onto your computer before you can use them, unlike RDC which is built in. But a first time user that isn't knowledgeable in all of the facts of RDC, would have to go online anyway to find out what's wrong when some of them try to use Windows XP Home as a host.

Another thing that I like about VNC applications is that it will run on different OSes, not just Windows. As Michael J said, a RDC Client Application for Mac has been developed. The same thing holds true for a lot of VNC applications.

The bottom line is: VNC applications are more easier to use for first time remote desktop users. Both the VNC Server and the VNC Client of most VNC applications fully support all of M$ Operating Systems from 95 on up while RDC does not. A lot of them now have encryption plug-ins too. Their help files are much more explanatory. Everybody has their opinions to which one is the best of the two. For me, I say VNC. Some people prefer RDC, while others prefer a VNC application. I'm not mad, but just trying to make my point.

God Bless.

I believe in the Big Bang. God said it, and BANG it happened!

RWD196,

Telling someone to use VNC when they are asking how to use RDC (RDP) is similar to someone saying they would like to solve a problem with IE and telling them to use Firefox instead.
If someone asked how to play tennis would you tell them to take up ping pong because you had a bad experience with tennis or because you sweat less?
I'd might offer the IE solution or instruct them in the game of tennis and then offer the alternatives as an add on. But that's me.

So you had your bad experience with RDC.

I did it in reverse than yourself.

I tried TightVNC and it worked fine but later got a new PC with XP Pro. I knew that it, unlike, the Home edition could host an RDP session. It was one of the reasons I opted for Pro over Home edition. I read the instructions, installed the client software on my first (Win98SE) machine and it was really simple.

Connecting from outside of my network (LAN) was more difficult but the same process for either product.

I respect your opinion and I am sorry that you had trouble with RDP (RDC). It is possible that your 40 minutes working with RDP made your experience with VNC, simple.

In the case of this thread, the OP has XP Pro and asking how to configure it's Remote Connection utility.

I believe that has been answered and the OP may not even been around to see those replies but like so many similar posts they become a debate of which is better instead of just answering the poster's question and that debate is usually triggered by yourself.

I don't have a problem with this but like a co-worker telling the same old story about when s/he did this or that. The first time it is interesting.

However, this would be a good thread to offer in a link for reference in future, similar queries.

IE is good
Firefox is good
Tennis is good
Ping Pong is good
RDP is good
VNC is good

If I ask about Firefox, don't tell me about Ping Pong though.
:)

Best regards,
Bryan

Ping Pong? A new browser?

Larry

Today seems like a good day to chew through the restraints.

"IE is good
Firefox is good
Tennis is good
Ping Pong is good
RDP is good
VNC is good"

If you say VNC is good, then why the debate? Don't blame it back on me. I suggested using something different simply to save trouble for the OP! VNCs are easier to use for first time users. If he/she gets used to VNCs for awhile, then he/she can gain enough knowledge to switch back to RDC if he/she wants to. You have to learn the easier stuff before the harder stuff. We all here give suggestions from our own experience, and I was just giving mine.

I believe in the Big Bang. God said it, and BANG it happened!

"If you say VNC is good, then why the debate"

"We all here give suggestions from our own experience, and I was just giving mine."

Right, suggestions rather than answers to the question.

The point was that the user has XP and RDC and asked how to use it but because you had a rough time with it you wouldn't offer an answer to the OP's question. Simple enough.

If I ask how to play tennis then I am not going to want an answer that tells me to give it up because it is too difficult to play and then tell me to take up ping pong especially if I already have a tennis racquet.

I really don't care one way or the other except that every time someone asks how to use RPC you do not give the answer to the question as asked...simply because...

Why not just tell anyone that asks about RDC to give it up because you find it is too difficult.

Is my understanding correct?

This thread, with 20 responses, started by kyetech, is more about you than his/her question.

I am not here to create a hassle. I just want to offer answers to people's questions.

I too enjoy the banter that we now share but are we not wasting Justin's bandwidth since this has nothing to do with OP's thread?

God bless you too,
Bryan

And, your whole point about RD being more difficult was based upon the fact that the CP you were trying to use it with didn't support it. How does that make it a more difficult product for this poster who has XP Pro? No software to install, enable 1 checkbox and that's it.

Michael J

"The point was that the user has XP and RDC and asked how to use it but because you had a rough time with it you wouldn't offer an answer to the OP's question. Simple enough."

Huh?? Uh, let me repeat that again... Huh?? The above statement dosn't make any sense. What do you mean by "I had a rough time with it" and "you wouldn't offer an answer to the OP's question." Yes I did answer offer an answer. If you recall, I told the OP to disable his firewall. Although I was wrong about the firewall, you can't blame me for not trying to help fix his problem.

I don't understand why you're blaming me for starting this debate. All I said was that "RDP is a pain to set up, believe me", and you had to say something about it. If you don't want to start a debate and waste Justin's bandwidth, then don't reply!!!! When you say something about it, that adds more to the debate! So don't be blaming me, ok? I was just trying to help, and to make it easier for the OP.

"This thread, with 20 responses, started by kyetech, is more about you than his/her question."

What in the world do you mean by "more about me?" That makes no sense to me at all. Even if it did, it's not my fault because you're the one that keeps replying to the "debate."

I don't think you should judge and criticize people that just give suggestions.

"If I ask how to play tennis then I am not going to want an answer that tells me to give it up because it is too difficult to play and then tell me to take up ping pong especially if I already have a tennis racquet."

We're not talking about tennis here. We're talking about RDP vs. VNC. Even if we were talking about tennis, I would have a totally different view on that. There is no easier way to play tennis; but there is an easier way to go when it comes to using Remote Desktop applications. That's my opinion, and you should respect that, like I do your opinion.

One more thing: The OP said nothing about the 2nd PC he's trying to use with RDP. So you don't know for sure if the host is XP Pro or not.

So Kyetech: what is the OS of the 2nd PC?? Are you making sure that a XP Pro PC is the host?

To all of the critics: You can't say anymore that I'm trying to overlook the problem!

That's all I have to say right now.

I believe in the Big Bang. God said it, and BANG it happened!

Works for me.

Bryan

Exactly! You're getting the point. RDP may work better for you, and VNCs work better for me.

Kyetech, hope you've got it nailed.

I believe in the Big Bang. God said it, and BANG it happened!

No, I was stating that ending the dialog works for me.

Can't help but wonder that after learning how to use the VNCs have you tried using RDC to see how easy it is?

Regards,
Bryan

Sure, I have. Other than having to figure out what the Domain box and the username/password boxes were for, it was pretty easy. But you see that was after I tried VNC applications. I still recommend VNCs because when you run most of them, you get a very simple to use prompt that just asks for the IP of the host. There's no confusing Domain prompt. If you're familiar with VNCs, then it's easier to get used to RDP.

I believe in the Big Bang. God said it, and BANG it happened!

When I open RDC I see a single input field entitled "Computer" where I input the computer name or IP address. Then I click the "Connect" button.

If on my LAN then I user computer name.
If connecting outside of my LAN I user the IP address.

It does have the Options button in case you want to enter the login credentials of the computer you are connecting to. I prefer not to use it to keep it simple plus if connecting to the office PC I want to see the login prompt of the office PC that includes the Domain name field once I connect.

Relatively the same as the VNC clients; a single input field used to enter the name or IP address of the computer one is connecting to.

Best regards,
Bryan

True, but I remember entering the IP address into the blank, clicked Connect, and it gave an error saying that the remote computer could not be contacted, and that I should try again. I clicked "Options" and got confused even more when I saw a Domain box, and, well, you know the rest. All I did with TightVNC was set a password on the Server, launched the Client on another computer, entered the Server's IP, clicked OK, and then it asked for the password that was set on the Server; there was no Domain box, or anything like that. You say that RDP is as easy for you as VNCs are, and I believe that, but it wasn't at first for me. It varies from person to person.

I believe in the Big Bang. God said it, and BANG it happened!

I suggested to use a VNC, because the OP may find it easier. If I suggest a VNC application to another OP in another thread, that person may not find a VNC to be any more easier to use, but yet he may. All I am trying to do is make it very simple for the OP.

As for me, I am done with this thread. I don't want to make it any longer. You know my reasons for suggesting a VNC; if you agree, that's ok. If you don't, that's fine too, but I would appreciate it if you keep your comments to yourself. That way, we'll both be happy. If you don't say anything about me, I won't about you.
I believe in the Big Bang. God said it, and BANG it happened!

If you could either leave out or move the following to the end of your responses for RDC queries then things would be cool:
"Remote Desktop Connection is a pain to set up, believe me."

Or even modify it to say something a little more correct such as:
"I personally find Remote Desktop Connection to be a pain to set up."

In this way it is clearly your experience and not the general consenses of CN contributors nor the IT industry in whole.

Thanks for your attention,
Bryan

So, if I reword it like that, you won't try to criticize me, and in other words start another debate, right? I'll do anything other than leave this forum to end these debates.

I believe in the Big Bang. God said it, and BANG it happened!

Absolutely. Offer a solution, share your experiences and offer an alternative. What more could a poster ask for?

Please make no mistake in thinking that I, in any way, want or suggest that you or anyone else leave these forums. I am, by no means, a moderator of these forum boards.

It is the contributors, like yourself, that make this forum board the best or one of the best available resources for people with PC problems.

Note: "forum" by definition is "A public facility to meet for open discussion." (or debate).

Best regards,
Bryan

Ok, I'll try to remember that. Take care!