The release of Apple Remote Desktop 2 in June was yet another sign that Apple is building an increasingly enterprise-centric portfolio. Tools that help reduce technical support and system downtime and also automate software updates are critical. “My contention is that even as a small company, it is best to buy an integrated solution that addresses 80 to 90 percent of need,” said Forrester analyst David Friedlander. “It will significantly reduce management and support costs.“
Apple Remote Desktop 2: An Inside Look
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
This article, like most info out there about ARD2, is misleading. The ‘case study’ used in the article mentions a 600 computer environment… but it’s a school, and they talk about Office 2004… put 2 and 2 together and that means there are 600 OSX machines being managed. They don’t say this explicitly.
With that said, I think ARD2 is a step in the right direction.
I would have wish that the asset management could be cross platform as well then even IT manager from Win world would find it usefull
Well,
The article does say
“The inclusion of Virtual Network Computing, better known as VNC, enables Macintosh administrators to access and control Unix and Windows systems with the popular open source tool installed.”
Now, how effective is the VNC portion of ARD2? This, I do not know.
I have been using ARD 2 for a month now, and I have to say, it is very very nice. It has reduced my running around ( we have about 145 workstations ). Is it flawless, nope, it crashes, it hickups, but most of the time, its pretty solid. I think so far the only mistake apple has made with it is having the price too low. I think this tool is very valuable, and should be much more than $400.00. ( Not that I am complaining about the price )
Who cares? The fact is, the Mac has these new features and if it’s just to get parity… well, there’s parity now. More importantly, they used *open sourced standards* to get it done.
Yes, remote desktop comes with WinXP.. but it’s only a REMOTE DESKTOP.
Try to have remote desktop manage 150 workstations AT ONCE. ARD can do this.
Example from ARD (dont have 2 yet): Select all or just some of your workstations in a list, select the program you want them all to install and click OK. It’s that simple, just walk away while all those machines install the program. You have many features like ‘Lock Screen’ so you can use the computer while they stare at a blank screen. You can also do things like share a screen, I am not talking about the basic crap. You can select some or all of your workstations and tell them to ‘see YOUR screen’, good for demonstration. If I know Apple, version 2 is packed with two or three times the features of the original version. There is also alot of features I left ouf of this post that are in the first version of the software.
You should read more info about ARD before you compare it to anything that is ‘free’
that are not included in xp pros remote desktop. we all know this.
and yes, it also has some features that are not included in windows server 2003 as well.
my point is that the bulk of apples remote desktop functionality is provided free with the base oses from ms.
if all you need is simple remote desktop you get it with xp pro.
if you have a client server environment and need powerful management tools, windows server provides those with the os.
before you go off on me becuase I ‘didnt read your artical’
we were only talking about the remote desktop feature. I dont have to purchase a very expensive server to do all the crap that you listed. Becides, the only reason why that crap is free from MS is becuase they get tired of customers complaining about security every 30 seconds, and dont want their customers to blow up on them when they hear “if you want to keep your computers up to date, then just purchase our updating service!” It’s all about keeping the noise down, just face it.
These are a honest question. No sarcasm no whatever. I really do not know the answer to them
Can you, with Windows Remote Desktop, install new packages (OS updates, application updates or simply new apps) to all computers serving RD at once, with one single drag and drop, drop down menu or something?
Can you copy or delete one file to/from all those computers serving WRD at once from the client computer you are managing your lab?
If the answer to any questions is “no” (which I do not know, I confess I did not read all the details about WRD) then WRD would seem to be more aimed towards, if we are talking about how it benefits IT guys, remotely managing a server or monitoring single workstation’s users requests for help, while ARD would seem aimed towards managing large amounts of workstations at once (and having the extra possibility to also connect to a single one).
But I would need a confirmation that WRD is really thought towards simple one to one connections…
Can you install any form of Windows Remote Desktop server component to other Windows versions such as Home or 2000? (ARD server -which Apple calls client, duh!- can be installed in any Mac OS X version machine AFAIK)
If you only want Remote Desktop functionality VNC is free, and its out there any many flavors available for Mac OS X, but its performance is, granted, quite bad compared to WRD or ARD.
the basic sum of what you asked is no. windows remote desktop doesnt do what apple remote desktop does in the realm of administration.
the administration stuff that ard does is generally handled by a server os on the ms side. via active directory, group objects, and myriad other tools that again either come free with the server os or are free downloads from ms site as they have been added since the os release or have been updated to add functionality.
The old protocol also used in Apple Network Administrator is better than VNC IME. This is a step backwards.
software, hardware, etc bulletin board style news source
readers share information on the news that is posted.
the subject is remote desktop control and management
i posted information for a competing set of products.
they vary in price and feature set and the platform they run on.
i dont love windows more than anything in the world. nor do i hate macs.
my points relate in many ways:
some mac users will buy ard to get basic functionality that comes free in xp and server 2003.
others will buy ard for its advanced management functions that come free in windows server 2003.
does ard have some features that neither win xp or server 2003 have? yes.
do xp and server 2003 have features that mac os, mac os x server, and ard dont have? yes.
discuss the subject at hand and please cease the frenzied apple defensiveness. tell us about the features and why its a good buy or not.
apple does not exist in a vacuum. comparisons amongst computing platforms are a common way of determining value.
I see .chvlva.adelphia.net’s point. Fact of the matter is this is just another add-on service that should have been included initially in the OS. Especially considering the fact that many of us have updated OSX several times now in the past few years for 129 a pop.
and and another note, leet speak is outdated.
So MS employee Anonymous (IP: —.chvlva.adelphia.net, your posts are worthless as always.
Then is this guy going to be banned?
I really like the install packages,
the put clients to sleep (and wake up of course).
The ability to monitor numerous machines on 1 screen.
A lot of cool stuff.
Should be, “When is this guy going to be banned?”
One thing that should be mentioned,
ARD is really good on a network,but doesn’t work that well administering over the internet, Timbuktu or VNC is better at that, IMHO.
“ARD is really good on a network,but doesn’t work that well administering over the internet, Timbuktu or VNC is better at that, IMHO.”
windows remote desktop however is finely tuned for access across the internet, even on dial up.
and even allows control from a web browser. no need for a client to be installed even.
I think a lot of Windows users out there are still confused by Apple’s choice of naming convention and so compare ARD to Windows Remote Desktop (or whatever) instead of comparing it to SMS (or whatever).
my understading from talking to Windows techs in the industry is that these tools are free because they’re crap (at least they were when they were first introduced) compared to the market dominant SysAdmin and monitoring tools that were already out there (eg. IBM’s Tivoli, Hp’s OpenView, etc.)
if you’re not convinced remember that this is a tactic MS has always used (more or less succesfully), just think of Internet Explorer and Windows Media…
I don’t know any shops that consolidate on a single vendor (although I think it’s every customer’s wet dream), but in Apple’s niche market I would guess that an all Apple solution is looking more and more attractive…
BTW at work I have a Windows 2k box (but I’m a mainframe systems programmer), whereas at home I have (and always will have) a Macintosh.
vlastimil
some of the enterprise offerings you mention are in fact considered to be even better than any of ms offerings. esp when you look at them from just a few years ago.
ms has come a long way in this department however as their oses have scaled to very large installations.
for really large solutions SMS is key, or as you point out, many CIOs turn to third party solutions for a variety of reasons.
however on the low end, small to medium sized business, ms offerings that are free do a fantastic job and get very favorable reviews for being free tools.
apple is playing catch up in a big way in network administration.
“windows remote desktop however is finely tuned for access across the internet, even on dial up. ”
You miss the point, but thats not surprising.
ARD is meant for use on a network,and works extremely well for what it was designed for. I was pointing out if someone wanted to use it to control a machine across the country, there are other solutons for the mac. This thread is talking about an Apple software designed for the Macintosh, I don’t think a windows solution is an answer on this thread.
Whatever.
apple is playing catch up in a big way in network administration.
agreed, after all Apple has only very recently entered the server market.
however, since MS has always played catchup to Apple in the desktop market, wouldn’t you say that chances are that Apple might just overtake MS in the server– it might happen in many years time or it might not happen at all, but I’d say Apple is the best candidate out there to do so.
what say you?
Didn’t mean to.
But this guy;s windows is better than mac nomatter what the subject gets me to respond.
I usually just read the threads and speak up when I see potentially interesting threads being derailed so consistently.
actualy I’m not new to macs and I didn’t forget those things you correctly pointed out, in fact I’m pretty sure Macs had tcp/ip before Windows did.
and comparing the current Xserve+Mac OS X Server to the ’90s PPC+A/UX is underestimating Apple’s commitment to entering the Enterprise (I guess that’s the word I should have used instead of saying “server market”)
or were you merely trying to thwart the discussion?
vlastimil,
many simply forget or do not know that apple has been a network oriented computer since its earliest days and has had servers as well for a long time indeed.
ms is the new guy in town when it comes to server oses and networked desktop oses. nt took the world by storm and has been growing ever since. just over 10 yrs ago ms had virtually no server presence. they are now very strong even in the highest reaches of gigantic enterprise computing.
i can remember the days of novell dominance and apple having a pretty substantial server market in edu.
one of the reasons why biz is leery of apple, is there lackluster commitment to the space. every few years they launch an ad campaign and some hot new equipment but where does it really go?
sorry, I misunderstood you.
and I agree with what you’ve written. I live and work in Italy so my perception of the industry is somewhat limited as regards to the reality in the USA (mostly due to media spin).
but lets talk about the current state of affairs:
how do you see Apple, Novell and all the other Linux and BSD shops dethroning the NT monster?
I’d rather not get into politics, but I’d say government has a huge responsibility either way.
Microsoft also comes with free viruses and spyware.
If the machine isn’t already screwed up after first loading their OS, give it a few minutes…
They HAVE to include all those tools for free so you can spend the majority of your day chasing down and fixing all the bad OS design decisions they foisted onto unsuspecting users.
We disable RD on XP desktops and instead use VNC because it has a smaller footprint and offers much more flexibility.
“how do you see Apple, Novell and all the other Linux and BSD shops dethroning the NT monster?
I’d rather not get into politics, but I’d say government has a huge responsibility either way.”
much of the world doesnt see it as a governmental issue.
its a consumer issue. end users will purchase what they believe gives them the greatest value for their money. whatever purchases are made include a balance of trade offs and benefits, regardless of the platform chosen.
in ms case, you can say the big trade off is security. that however is improving. win2k3 server is much more secure than win2k. svc pk 2 xp is more secure than day one xp from 2001. etc etc. informed end users know that ms has security issues. they know it the most used server and desktop os. it is the most attacked. yet they keep buying it because it offers them so much more that they want.
i dont see apple dethroning anyone. they have been relegated to a few tiny niche markets and their last really large opportunity, edu, is still slowly sending them packing. print designers and all things related and video pros and finally boutique buyers will be the last stronghold. all three of those markets can likewise be served well by other alternatives and those other choices have already grabbed large market share from apple (ie both quark and adobe sell more dtp software to windows than they do mac).
novell is in deep trouble and better hope their linux efforts produce results quickly. they perform pathetically financially.
hp and ibm are just using linux in whatever way they can to slow ms. they have no allegiance.
sun is in hot water but gets the message that consumers want x86 servers more than they want high end proprietary hardware.
linux is a very real threat across many spaces. esp commodity servers used for web serving.
the desktop will be much harder nut to crack.
at the moment it is hard to see ms being slowed because in the end, despite all of their problems and faults, consumers of all stripes overwhelmingly want their products.
I am a Mac user that cannot defend the technology I prefer.
It’s not a matter of ‘cannot’, it’s a matter of ‘being sick and tired of’ – in particular when the attacks come from people who irrevocably made up their mind before they even write the first word.
Or how would you feel if in your favourite restaurant there would be a guy extolling that you could get way more food for much less money over at $OTHER_RESTAURANT. Using a bull horn.
“”many simply forget or do not know that apple has been a network oriented computer since its earliest days and has had servers as well for a long time indeed. ”
On OSnews?”
hard to resist any jab huh?
yes, on osnews i would assume there is a fair percentage of readers that do not have experience in computers dating to the early 90s much less to the early to mid 80s.
is that hard to believe that not everyone on this site is oh, 40+ yrs old and been involved in computer technology all of their lives?
seriously?
“in particular when the attacks come from people who irrevocably made up their mind before they even write the first word.”
i have written on here several times that i am not anti mac. have no mac or apple hatred. have used macs since they came out and that within the last year i gave away my last mac.
i have also said that the 12″ powerbook is a fine computer and that i would buy one if i had need for an ultralight laptop.
having both positive and critical views of a computing platfrom does not turn you into a troll.
having critical opinions of something is quite different from having hatred or a closed mind or whateve else the next mac defender will care to make up about me.
It’s not even close to being about ‘defending the mac’. That is so lame in many ways.
No mature person needs to defend a computer platform.
What the problem is you derailing or shifting the discussion on every mac thread into mac vs. windows.
That is all.
I do agree though that some of the longer posts by certain anonymous users are a bit tiring and appear to be geared to incite ire rather than foster good discussion. Having said that I have found these debates interesting and lively (except for the name calling). I think some of the discussions about alternatives and costs vs functionality ARE relevent.
I come from a Windows background and have made the leap into the Linux environment. To further support some of my clients (but mostly for the sheer geek pleasure) I am interested in purchasing a MAC. If I do I will have to use remote desktop software. My goal is really cross platform compatibility or at least a remote client that can handle multiple protocols (tsclient in linux?).
I should point out that Terminal Server on Win2003 RDesktop does have certain and confusing licensing issues. See the link below for more information (and a good head-spin):
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/howtobuy/licensing/pricl…
So I’m not sure that it is as “free” as previously stated especially when connecting from earlier versions of Windows.
Also further point out that in order to RDesktop to an XP machine the user at the local machine gets logged out which can be a pain. Note: I could easily be missing something in the config but that’s been my experience.
I’m currently using vnc most places but the full functionality and extranet speed is not quite there yet.
Just my 2 cents though.. ymmv
E.
nearly all threads on osnews have comparisons
programming tools are compared
hardware is compared
drm is compared
linux distros are compared to other linux distros
music services are compared
oses are compared
hardware is compared
on and on and on
yes sometimes there is a discussion where it stays precisely on topic and focuses solely on one single issue. but as half your posts are aimed at taking exception with anyone that posts not precisely on topic as you see it, you are therefore as guilty as anyone for not upholding this mac only discussion.
if you are a mac user and cannot stand to see apple products compared to the competition, whether it be on the mac or on other platforms, you are the one with the problem.
my god! they did a news story on ms getting ready to ship virtual server and someone had the gall to mention vmware!
BAN THEM!
get over it already.
I wasn’t just referring just to you.
i have also said that the 12″ powerbook is a fine computer and that i would buy one if i had need for an ultralight laptop.
Two threads ago you trotted out specs and prices for a light Windows laptop as if no sane person would think of spending more – and now you want us to believe that? Yeah, right.
having both positive and critical views of a computing platfrom does not turn you into a troll.
They way you express them, however, does. You definitely lack tact and respect for others and their choices.
Most of all you don’t respect that Mac users knowingly made a choice in going for a more expensive, less powerful computer – living and let live seems to be a foreign concept to you.
averatec 12″ 4.5lb laptop is a very good value but it does not have the feature set of the 12″ powerbook.
some would choose the features (the powebook has much more)
some would choose based on the price (the averatec is substantially less expensive)
again it must be all or nothing with you.
“I do agree though that some of the longer posts by certain anonymous users are a bit tiring and appear to be geared to incite ire rather than foster good discussion”
i post long threads at times to do several things:
one i give links for attribution so people can verify too
i like to support opinion with facts or data so as to not seem like just an opinionated troll
to be well informed, at times it can take a bit of material to do it. many links may be needed, many paste jobs may be needed
i tend to paste data here so that it is easier for folks to read….they dont have to leave and come back as you do with just a link.
two i post relevant info. if people read the review of ard, they need some frame of reference when comparing if they are not already familiar. my long post was an effort to inform people of the differences.
long threads are not geared towards inciting ire, whatever or why ever it would do that, i do not know? read it if you want to be informed, skip it if you know it, browse it if you dont have lots of time….????? i dont get it. if it is tiring, likewise skip it.
It should be when is this guy going to be banned, again.
Keep trolling, TheSeeker, and you’ll be gone once again.
again it must be all or nothing with you.</>
Considering that I have more PCs running than Macs – I don’t think so.
[i]two i post relevant info. if people read the review of ard, they need some frame of reference when comparing if they are not already familiar.
So why don’t you go over into the Linux Driver article and inform them about how little of a problem drivers are under Windows? They surely need a frame of reference, too.
i thought (granted i haven’t done an install of 10.3 in some time) that ARD 1.3 or so was included in panther installs?
i mean, i know it’s not nearly as powerful as ARD 2, but it was pretty decent for being included in the OS, and isn’t that what a lot of heckling is about? “they should’ve included something!”… of course i could be wrong, and im sure that if i am, i will have a 5 paragraph response filled with links and price lists telling me just how wrong i am.
“So why don’t you go over into the Linux Driver article and inform them about how little of a problem drivers are under Windows? They surely need a frame of reference, too.”
because my expertise is with macs even more so than with windows.
i am inexperienced when it comes to linux and would be trolling to comment on virtually anything related to it in any significant way.
my skill set with macs is now 20 yrs running. my skill set with linux is an off again on again toying about with it since about oh ’97 or so. occasionally installing it, playing with it, testing it etc does not qualify me.
i am more than qualified to comment right here in mac threads.
i would however enjoy seeing some linux pro commenting about their solutions as they relate to macs.
wouldnt you?
i would however enjoy seeing some linux pro commenting about their solutions as they relate to macs.
wouldnt you?
Taking ARD as an example:
Comments about how ARD and Linux, or Linux/VNC and Mac work together (or not) – definitely.
Comments about ARD can do $COOL_FEATURE, but the poster only needs $SIMPLE_FEATURE, which $SOFTWARE happens to implement on Linux while being free – sure.
Page long feature lists with more or less obvious jabs about how Linux did this for years for no cost – sheesh, take that beancounter mindset elsewhere.
Your WRD posting could have been much more interesting if you had highlighted the main advantages and disadvantages of WRD compared to ARD (I estimate three of four short paragraphs would have been sufficient). But as it stands, it’s just intentional flamebait.
Ok, I was the first poster on this. It appears that this thread has degenerated with more unclear information about ARD2.
ARD2 is not comparable to VNC or Remote Desktop. Most people (people who don’t understand what it means to administer several machines) don’t understand this and say things like, “VNC and Remote Desktop are free, why do I need ARD2?”. Apple’s marketing hasn’t helped this either since they taut the inclusion of VNC in ARD2 as some great feature which it simply is NOT. The strength of ARD2 is in distributing software and scripting groups of machines.
ARD2 is not good for heterogeneous computing environments unless all or most of the machines are macs. It was made for OSX to administer OSX machines. Apple’s marketing makes you think it is an enterprise solution and in most people’s minds that means a solution for heterogeneous environments. It is absolutely NOT this type of solution.
Who knows if anyone will read this far into the thread. Thread hijacking is really bad. Apple enterprise marketing is really bad. These two together make me not want to bother reading anything about Macs.
“Most of all you don’t respect that Mac users knowingly made a choice in going for a more expensive, less powerful computer – living and let live seems to be a foreign concept to you.”
Lars… you’re starting to believe the propaganda spouted by the Seeker! Macs are never cheap, but they are often competitive on price, feature for feature. And at the high end, for high performance computing, nothing from Intel can compete with a dual G5. (AMD is competitive, though).
Have a look at the following link: it compares several scientific programs that need really fast processors, and finds that a HP workstation (dual-Xeon processors running at 3.2 Ghz, running Linux) can’t compete. And remember that this story is several months old, and the current top-of-the-line G5 is now 25 per cent faster than the Mac used in this test. Time is money. Biologists can save a bundle because they can do everything faster on a Mac.
<http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/computers/2004/4/desktop…
Really… The Seeker’s opinions to the contrary, there’s never been a better time to be a Mac user. They have a fantastic line of both consumer and professional desktops and laptops, the hottest music player on the market, and best of breed software in just about every category in which they compete. In fact, I’ve read several stories lately which suggest that Apple’s revenues increased by 30 per cent last quarter, and predicting that they’ll increase by 50 per cent this quarter, compared to last year.
The Seeker (chvlva.adelphia.net) is a smart guy, but he’s getting desparate because he knows the tide has turned.
Against all odds, Apple seems to be regaining marketshare, as we’ll see in the months ahead.
http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/computers/2004/4/desktop…
“The strength of ARD2 is in distributing software and scripting groups of machines.”
I think that is why the above poster keeps pointing out that MS provides solutions like Remote Desktop to users for free if all they need to do is control a single machine and that they provide extensive tools in their server OS for managing a larger number of PCs.
The point is that if you are running a network of any size, MS provides better solutions via the server OS, Active Directory, Group Policy, and many add on tools that are freely distributed. For those running very large enterprises, MS provides and even more robust solution that scales.
ARD appears to be a moderately low end tool designed to add administration capabilities for reasonably small networks.
Here’s a year old dual Xeon 3Ghz beating the brand new dual 2.5Ghz Mac in Cinebench.
A year old PC! Today, you could buy two of those machines for the same price and double your performance.
http://barefeats.com/g5c.html
With the Xeon you could buy 4 CPUs today for the same price or you can go for the new 3.6Ghz models with the faster system bus.
Please don’t go posting Apple benchmarks unless they are for Mac only programs.
We can go ahead and bring out all the guns to show how slow the pricey Macs really are.
Mac benchmarks, what a joke. Apple disabling hyperthreading, Apple using a specially built OS, Apple using a pre-production, not publicly available machine. Apple dropping the subject once the G5 was out. Third party after third party testing labs have shown the Mac to be slower than PCs in nearly every regard.
Maxon even says that the program isn’t even optimized for the G5 on their homepage and to wait for one, while it is heavily optimized for the P4/Xeon. The results should be taken with a grain of salt, like pretty much every other benchmark.
If a school has a mac osx they are kinda screwed right because the tech department only has so much cash a year so they cant update to the newest version of osx every time it comes out of get all the handy dudads that is about the best thing in microsofts favor here they are lazy so only release an os who knows how often and keep updates free
And how is a story in a Popular Mechanics an Apple benchmark?
Three tests were run by a Popular Mechanics, a third-party, totally-independent magazine.. and PM was shocked to discover just how much faster the G5 was when compared to the Xeons. And if you had taken the time to read the article, and visit the HP site, you would have discovered that the dual Xeon computer tested actually cost a great deal MORE than the G5.
And finally… Maxon has stated publically that when Cinebench is finally optimized for the G5, they expect the benchmarks to improve by a significant percentage. It’s a BETA… and it even says so on the Barefeats site.
Sheesh!
If a school has a mac osx they are kinda screwed right because the tech department only has so much cash a year so they cant update to the newest version of osx every time it comes out of get all the handy dudads that is about the best thing in microsofts favor here they are lazy so only release an os who knows how often and keep updates free
No.. they may actually save money with OS X. Apple sells OS X Panther Server for a very reasonable price; if memory serves, it’s $499 for 10 licenses, and $999 for unlimited installations. Depending upon the school’s size, they may save a bundle by going with Apple, as Microsoft charges a fee for every installation. At some point, going with Microsoft costs more. 🙂
And OS X Server (Panther) works incredibly well.
“I earnestly recommend Panther Server for any small- or medium-sized business that wants to establish or expand their networking infrastructure. OS X Server rates a ‘X’.” (I think that means he gives it a 10/10 🙂
— Martin Streicher, Editor-in-Chief, Linux Magazine.
If microsoft charges for each liecense my school loses a hell of a lot of money (high school) because there programing department gives away free copys of XP pro and VS.net 2003 to students and that seems really cost ineffecent
Testing 1 2 3