remote desktop on Win2k clients

[SMO6]

I've got the WinXP Resource Kit book here and I'm scanning Chp 8. From the looks of things all I have to do is install the client from the WinXP disk and I should be ready to go, right????

WRONG! I can't connect yet. The error I'm getting is:

The client could not connect to the remote computer. Remote connections may not be enabled or the computer might be too busy to accept new connections. It is also possible that network problems are preventing your connection.

I poked around Control Panel and didn't really find anything promising, help!

*Note this computer already has some remote tools installed for SMS 2003, could this be the root of the problem?

Later,

SmAu6

 

[Davetoo]

Not sure what you're trying to do.


If you're trying to use Remote Desktop Connection to connect to a W2K machine...won't work. You can install the RDP on the W2K machine, however, and access XP systems or Terminal Servers, but you can't use it to connect to a W2K Pro machine.

You'll need to use 3rd party like VNC, etc.

I'm Certifiable, not certified.
It just means my answers are from experience, not a book.

 

[SMO6]

How lame, guess I didn't read very thoroughly. How is it I can connect to a Win2k server using TS/RD but not a Win2k Pro box? Pardon my French but am I the only one that thinks this is just a bit GAY?! t(-_-)t

I hope Bill is a good boxer Q(*_ºQ)

$m4u6

 

[bofhrevenge2]

MS didn't include this in W2k as there are loads of great offerings like VNC which is free or Dameware

http://www.dameware.com/products/

which is just plain excellent and quite cheap.

It's included in Win2k server for the purpose of remote admin the fact they didn't put it in 2k Pro seems quite reasonable to me.

 

[zaznet]

bofh,

Microsoft did not say "oh, there are plenty of OTHER products to purchase to do this" and leave out RD from 2K Pro. They said "We can make them pay for this" and left it out. They do want the remote desktop product to make them money, but they also want to hold a majority of the market. In the end, holding a majority over the competition has won out and most new systems should include the remote desktop capabilities.

The real interesting thing is that the software behind remote desktop was derived from the Unix GUI called "X Windows", software that was born at Xerox ages ago.

Nathan aka: zaz (zaznet)
zaz@zaz.net

http://www.zaz.net/

 

[bcastner]

The RD single client Host was completed as a part of the enhancements planned for NT as part and parcel of XP Professional as a client OS.

Don't you find it a little absurd to ask for a feature from a relatively new workstation OS (XP) for an older version workstation OS (Win2k) that is no longer being sold?

My first car only had an AM Radio. When later models had AM/FM, or modern cars with CD players, should I be mad?

 

[zaznet]

My first car only had an AM Radio. When later models had AM/FM, or modern cars with CD players, should I be mad?"

Not at all, I'm sure there are 50's to 70's model cars on the road today with CD players, mp3 juke boxes and XM Sattelite radio. You just have to install it

Really RD as a product can easily work on Windows 2000 if Microsoft wanted it to. It is not in their best interest to give out a feature enhancement for a pervious version of Windows. They do want you to buy the newer model, that's the only way they make money on it. Let me also state that there is nothing wrong with wanting to make money.

Nathan aka: zaz (zaznet)
zaz@zaz.net

http://www.zaz.net/

 

[bcastner]

zaznet,

Well, there is no question Microsoft wants you to move to XP Professional clients, and Windows 2003 servers. Either grants you the software for RD Host.

They have made the RD client software available online for all Win9x and and later clients.

http://www.microsoft.com/WINDOWSXP/remotedesktop/faq.asp

It may be inconvenient, but I do not think it unreasonable on Microsoft's part. Particularly as Win2k Pro as an OEM and retail client is no longer being sold by the company.
It ended its product life at the end of March, 2004:

http://www.microsoft.com/windows/lifecycle/default.mspx

Any analogies to OS and automobiles tends to make me cringe. My apologies for the note above.

Bill Castner

 

[bofhrevenge2]

Zaznet, as MS don't provide a RD solution for Win2k pro I think my point is justified, they had nothing to gain financially from not including it and as bcastner rightly pointed out RD is now included for free with XP.

 

[zaznet]

bofh,

The financial gain is the few clients that will upgrade to XP to allow RD on the workstation machines.

You can use the RD client on any windows system, but if you want to allow remote desktop access to the computer you either have to go with another product or upgrade. Such programs have been available long before windows 95 was on the market and some very good ones are available at low costs (even free).

Bill (bcastner),

Yeah, car analogies can go both ways too easily. I think we both see each others points clearly enough. Microsoft has every interest and really the right to do what they want with their software. We can their decisions or not.

Nathan aka: zaz (zaznet)
zaz@zaz.net

http://www.zaz.net/

 

[bofhrevenge2]

Zaznet i'm sorry to of offended i'm not defending MS i was meerly pointing out some FREE (VNC) and low cost alternatives.

Personally i feel that MS are against the wall alot of the time (due to their own actions in the past), including RD in Windows on the client could be seen as anti competative, the same problem they faced when they included a firewall in Windows and shortly i beleive AV software.

Thanks.

 

[zaznet]

bofh,

No, no offense here. I look at MS with a bit of love and hate. It's anoying to be locked into not being able to use a tool that COULD work on a given platform just because Microsoft doesn't want to release it for that platform. On the other side you have to appreciate that they are in this business to make money, and they sure are good at it too!

Yes, I was trying to get to the point about RD being an anti-competative practice. This is something that will be missed by the anti-trust guys in pin striped suits. So many things were missed in that trial.

The firewall competes with a number of traditional MS competitors. I still use my own persoanl copy of PsyGate beacuse I like it's features and lack low-visibility to the end users. I also use VNC, though I only start it up when I pre-plan to have remote access to my system beacuse it has pretty poor security.

As for anti-virus, I have been wondering for a long time when MS would do that again. When DOS 6 came out, it included Anti Virus software, even for Windows 3.X. I agree with you on the AV thought, it's well overdue. I think they will throw it out there and claim they are just trying to protect the users in their "safe computnig initiative".

Microsoft is presently working on a hardware and software system that will secure the entire system down. Each process, each CPU and other peripheral will have security keys. Part of it matches how they assembled the X-Box, and some of it mirrors components of AMD's Opteron. I forget the new name for it, but it was code named "Paladium".

Anyway, I hope you don't think we were mad at you. We don't get "angry", just "technical", and we can seem unfriendly when being technical.

Nathan aka: zaz (zaznet)
zaz@zaz.net

http://www.zaz.net/

 

[bofhrevenge2]

Ok, Cheers