Jump to content
  • 0
itinfserv

Looking for GoToAssist alternative

Question

We are in the process of moving over to LT but have been using GoToAssist to remote control PC's.

When we were in talks with LabTech people, all we kept getting told when asking about this and the performance of VNC was that with LabTech you shouldnt need to remote control.

 

Unfortunately supporting users systems isnt that simple and there are many times when you still need that remote control functionality. In fact we often used GTA to work from home.

 

What I am struggling to find is software that has the same level of performance that we had with GTA. I feel that this could be down to the whole idea of the tunnel. Everything we do over the tunnel is not as instant as it would be when you are at the server. Which is fine when you are working in the background, but when you are remoted into the server or users computer this can be annoying.

 

Ideally what I am looking for is a tool like GTA, TeamViewer or logmein (but crazy cheap or free) that we can fire up and it does a direct connection rather than going through the tunnel. Ideally something we can also access without using labtech as we have a server (and expect more in futrue) where LabTech stops working on that server and we lose all access to it. We GTA to it now and kill the process as the service is in the "Stopping" state and stuck there.

 

AeroAdmin looks interesting but not sure it will work looking at another post made today. Its also missing the console access we ideally need.

 

Has anyone found any solution to this that they are running with?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

17 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

  • 0

We currently use Bomgar, which is supposed to have integration with Labtech/Connectwise in the future. The licensing is based on Concurrent user login not concurrent remote sessions or endpoint licensing. The Bomgar device has a built-in customizable page that we use to direct customers to. We also have the ability to "pin" computers for access at a later point.

 

Another option that we were looking into is http://simple-help.com/overview. I do not have much information on this, but the licensing is much cheaper, and has the ability to be controlled via scripts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Thanks, I have used Bomgar before but the license is crazy expensive. I will look at simple-help and see what they have to offer.

 

Thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

We use ScreenConnect and love it. Excellent price point, features, and integration with Labtech via Shadoxity's Script (viewtopic.php?f=3&t=446)

 

The client is very fast and light weight and they continue to add many features. They have apps for for Iphone and Android devices (to view clients not actually remote into your phone). I recommend you try their trial. Good Luck!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Thanks euser4life,

 

I tried the trail before for SC, and wasnt blown away by the performance. The other concern is what it sees as a concurrent connection. Is it concurrent technicians, or connections to remote devices.

 

As in 1 technician may be connected to 4 servers. Is that 4 concurrent connections, or 1 according to them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

The performance is relative to many factors. We have ours installed on a Windows 2008 R2 virtual server (in house). It has plenty of internet bandwidth and server resources (6 gigs of RAM and two allocated CPU's). We are currently licensed for 10 concurrent sessions with over 300 unattended clients deployed (adding more each day) and it is blazing fast.

 

The concurrent licensing means that you can have an infinite number of technicians, but they can only have as many open active support sessions (not deployed unattended agents) as concurrent session licenses that you have purchased. In the event we have an on demand session (not unattended) you can always "park" it (when you close the session it asks if you want to keep the session to log on later). This free's up a license. Or if a tech accidentally leaves an unattended session open you can disconnect it to free up the license. The other big thing that I like is that they offer an unlimited license for $4,000, which we may purchase in the future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Just an FYI.....

 

One thing that I ran across this morning that will also impact ScreenConnect performance is a problem with PC's and Servers that use Matrox drivers. In order to get better performance you have to replace the Display driver with the standard Windows Generic driver and reboot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Thanks euser,

 

I have installed it on a VM with 4GB of Ram running Server 2012, tried it to a colleagues PC at home and it was really good. Was able watch a youtube video, it wasnt fluid but you could see what was going on. But most importantly was able to control the video (e.g. start and stop it). We have a customer who when I remote onto it is... laggy is the best way to describe it. Using SC, and has been fluid on this server. It is a world apart from VNC.

 

Only time will tell how it really compares to GTA, and that will require 5-10 active sessions to push the server to see that it holds up with multiple sessions.

 

If all is good, then this looks like a good solution. Unless there is something similar for free :)

 

Thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

@itinfserv

 

I have been using SC for several months now. I have also done quite a bit of load testing. I ran SC on a VM with 4GB of Ram running Server 2012, as well. I was deployed SC to over 200+ servers/workstations, and established 75 concurrent remote sessions. There was NO performance hit on my server. SC, in my opinion, is the top of the class.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

We have been using SC for a little over two years now. Absolutely love the product. Every once in a great while we will have small performance issues or hiccups but it is usually due to something going on on our network.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Anybody have experience running an SC server in Azure, ec2,or equivalent? I'm curious what kind of bandwidth would be used is this scenario. We currently have roughly 2, 000 agents in lt.

 

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

From above 'I ran SC on a VM with 4GB of Ram running Server 2012, as well. I was deployed SC to over 200+ servers/workstations, and established 75 concurrent remote sessions. There was NO performance hit on my server. '

 

This scenario is running on an Amazon ec2 Instance. Absolutely love ScreenConnect

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

+1 for ScreenConnect. We just started using it and only deployed it to a fraction of our client base to see how it would respond and how staff would respond. Thus far only positive feedback. It's been reliable, fast, and very quick to get connected. Footprint has been pretty small with the services only using 150MB of memory at rest with a little more than 2,000 endpoints installed. I'll be deploying another 2-3K next week and if that goes well, we'll deploy to the entire client base (12K+).

 

Maybe worth noting too is that before I deployed this last week, I never have touched the product. It was easy and straightforward to setup and we're off and running very quickly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Thanks guys for the performance info. They recommend 4GB ram per 10 sessions which seemed high to me. We are probably implementing early next year.

 

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

I'm intending to run about 12,000 endpoints on 12GB of memory and so far with about 300 endpoints deployed it's only using 150MB. The concurrent sessions is where you'll need the extra memory. We have a large staff and I could quickly exceed 50 concurrent sessions at any point during the day. What I did was look at when connections were initiated in the DB and pull a list of average concurrent sessions and planned memory around that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Been using SC for a while now and everyone loves it here. There are some annoyances around how it works, e.g we want to notify the customer we are connecting but have it just connect if they dont respond, that arnt implemented yet but are on the road map. And being used to VMWare and the Ctrl+Alt+Insert to issue a Ctrl+alt+del on the remote PC, which requires a mouse click on SC.

 

But these are minor and really not worth worrying about. Performance wise, as was said before, its about concurrent connections. Our server doesnt struggle at all. It performs like a dream. The only catch is servers with Matrox drivers, this is a known issue in SC and requires you to blank the guest machine for it to behave.

 

Labtech themselves use SC now for thier remote support, so with luck better integration is on the cards for future releases... which seam to take forever with LT.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×