Asus Chromebox versus Asus VivoPC
-
@Carnival-Boy said:
I got an Asus Chromebox a while ago and I like it, but I can't seem to find a reliable way to remote desktop onto a Windows machine, which is one of the main things I would want to do with it.
I thought I would have a look at an Asus VivoPC. This is a mini-PC with more or less the same specs as the Chromebox - both have a 1.4GHz Celeron CPU and 2GB RAM. The VivoPC comes with a 500GB SATA drive rather than the 16GB SSD of the Chromebox. The VivoPC comes with the tragically titled "Windows 8.1 with Bing". Both have a LAN port and Wifi, a DisplayPort and an HDMI port. The VivoPC has 6 USB ports whilst the Chromebox only has 4 and the VivoPC also has an SD card slot.
I hadn't paid much attention to the specs when I bought it. I was expecting a similar product to the Chromebox. The first thing that struck me was the size and weight. This thing is about three times the size of Chromebox and three times the weight:
Here we see the tiny Chromebox sitting on top of the massive VivoPC:
I thought I'd have a look inside and was shocked to see that the cause of the massive size and weight is the fact that if comes with a large format drive:
When I take out this drive and replace it with a spare SSD I have lying the thing loses all its weight and now weights the same as the Chromebox, but I'm left with a massive case that is full of air:
Pros:
I prefer Windows 8.1 to ChromeOS
Easy to upgrade - you can upgrade the RAM and the HDD. The Chromebox is a sealed unit, so you can't do anything with it.Cons:
Size and weight.To be fair, I probably bought the wrong model, but it was the only one available at my supplier at the time for a decent price. They are now selling the much smaller VivoMini for a mere GBP114 ($172) which is the same size as the Chromebox and comes without RAM, HDD or OS.
A Windows OS will cost you more than the whole computer.
-
I meant I was looking to use a Remote Desktop client to remote desktop onto another Windows Pro machine. So for that, the free Windows with Bing would suffice.
-
Right, but going to the VivoMini for $172 wouldn't work for you because you'd have to drop another $199 for Windows 8.1, so you're up to nearly $400. You'd have a smaller box, but spending a lot more cash.
But you're right, the current model you have that came with Windows 8.1 with Bing is great for your current project.
-
Yes, that's right.
One of the potential uses for this device is to install in our meeting rooms, connected to a large TV or monitor. Currently I have a full sized PC in the main conference room. Most users remote desktop onto their own PCs from there, so that their desktop is familiar and any applications that they use are available for the meeting. Windows with Bing (I can't keep using that stupid effing name) is fine for this, but I don't really like it, as I don't like the idea of a Windows PC that isn't connected to the domain (although I'm happy for Apple and Google devices that aren't connected to the domain so I'm not sure what the difference is). Also, not all users want to remote desktop onto their own PCs - they just want to use the conference room PC directly.
Even at $400, that is a pretty good price for a small PC though, don't you think? A better buy might be an HP 260 G1 which includes a Windows Pro licence and is slightly cheaper all in, but it's 40% bigger.
-
$400 is probably a pretty OK price. I guess it just depends on what you need the system to do.
Can't you RDP to your desktop from Chrome? Granted this doesn't solve the problem what the users who just want to the the conference room machine itself.
Does 40% make the device an issue for you?
As for Windows with Bing - you don't like it because it's not part of your MS tools that require domain machines. So I understand not liking it. That is why I don't like Apple/Google devices. All of them require third party additional costing options to centrally manage. OK maybe not third party.. but definitely more software for the sole purpose of managing them. Where Windows servers manage windows workstations for the cost of the server and CAL licenses which you have to have to use those other services... I'm sure at the end of the day, the money spent is probably close to the same or possibly even less on the Google side, doesn't currently make me like it any more.
-
@Dashrender said:
Can't you RDP to your desktop from Chrome?
I don't think so. I thought you could and I thought I did, but I can't get it to work now so I may have dreamt it.Does 40% make the device an issue for you?
It shouldn't, but I can be a little anal about these things. -
If you went with the $172 model you could use Linux (non-ChromeOS) for free and have solid RDP too. As an option.
-
What's the RDP reliability issues with ChromeBox? I've not tried this with those, but I know people use it for that. Does it drop the connections or something?
-
I simply can't find an RDP client for ChromeOS. Any suggestions would be most appreciated.
I've also considered Linux and I think that could be a really good solution.
-
@Carnival-Boy said:
I simply can't find an RDP client for ChromeOS. Any suggestions would be most appreciated.
I've also considered Linux and I think that could be a really good solution.
Oh. "No" client is very different from an unreliable one. I agree, none at all is very unreliable to the extreme. But slightly misleading
-
-
Chrome remote desktop doesn't use standard Microsoft RDP, so you need to install separate software in the PC you want to remote onto. It requires a bit of firewall configuration as well.
The first one looks promising though. It says it's "The only true Microsoft Remote Desktop app for the Chrome browser." so maybe there is one, and only one? I will give it a try.
-
There is definitely RDP for ChromeBox, just not sure that I got the right links.
-
Keep looking Scott! I originally used 2X RDP, which I think worked great (unless I dreamt it), but now doesn't work at all and isn't listed anywhere as an available app. Hence my use of the term "reliable".
-
https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/2x-client-for-2x-ras/nfkkcalpbgmfhnendooplbkmpfplmhga?hl=en does this work? I has this in the past. Of course we use the 2X Application Gateway at work and this won't allow you to do SSL connections.
-
@Carnival-Boy said:
Keep looking Scott! I originally used 2X RDP, which I think worked great (unless I dreamt it), but now doesn't work at all and isn't listed anywhere as an available app. Hence my use of the term "reliable".
It came up in my search.
-
@coliver said:
https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/2x-client-for-2x-ras/nfkkcalpbgmfhnendooplbkmpfplmhga?hl=en does this work? I has this in the past. Of course we use the 2X Application Gateway at work and this won't allow you to do SSL connections.
No, from the blurb on that page "2X Client for 2X RAS does not support standard Microsoft RDP connection."
I'm sure it did recently though, as I'm sure that is what I was using.
-
@Carnival-Boy said:
@coliver said:
https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/2x-client-for-2x-ras/nfkkcalpbgmfhnendooplbkmpfplmhga?hl=en does this work? I has this in the past. Of course we use the 2X Application Gateway at work and this won't allow you to do SSL connections.
No, from the blurb on that page "2X Client for 2X RAS does not support standard Microsoft RDP connection."
I'm sure it did recently though, as I'm sure that is what I was using.
2X has gone through a lot of changes recently... not all for the best in my opinion. Parallels recently bought them so maybe those changes were leading up to that.... They did indeed have a chrome app that allowed you to do RDP not sure what happened to it.
-
Cool. I guess I didn't dream it then.
The Fusion Labs client works ok. I can't seem to get it to work full screen though, which is annoying. And it's ten bucks.
Why are there so few? Do developers have to pay a licence fee to use Microsoft RDP?
-
@Carnival-Boy said:
Why are there so few? Do developers have to pay a licence fee to use Microsoft RDP?
RDP is an open protocol. Anyone can use it anytime. There are fully open source implementations available. On Linux in general, RDP clients are mature and robust.
