@Pete-S said in NoMachine Server running, not found:

@travisdh1 said in NoMachine Server running, not found:

@gjacobse said in NoMachine Server running, not found:

This is a bit frustrating - It seems that NoMachine is 'hit and miss' being being able to receive a connection. Searching for a device that is online find none, and the device shows running. Restarting the service may fix it, but many times doesn't seem too, and restarting the computer leaves the same issue - not found.

Some threads suggest re-installing it - which I will do, but seems like a poor fix on a service that should run on boot.

It's it just my aggravation is causing this or am I looking for something else?

That's why I never ended up using NoMachine. Too many issues like that.

And it's not free for commercial use - at least the last time I looked.

Can be, depends which one you are using.

@stuartjordan said in Neglect in the highest? Shocking!:

How can this still be happening in nearly 2022.

Because these aren't IT pros or IT firms. These are VARs scamming customers.

@pmoncho said in Windows RDS User Profiles - Migrate, Recreate or User Profile Disks?:

@Dashrender said in Windows RDS User Profiles - Migrate, Recreate or User Profile Disks?:

Cool, then you should have it easy.

FYI - Published apps still create a full profile on the RDS box, Just the desktop isn't presented to the user. If the application allows them to browse around, they could typically see the drive letters, the mapped printers, etc... that's why you still need to lock all that stuff down.

Thanks for the info. I will keep that in mind. I was debating about using UPD's like @wrx7m and that was my interest in this post.

Also, still planning out where to put Connection Broker, WebAccess and Licensing but that is another post.

For local profile management, UPDs are a lot cleaner. If we are not putting them on a file server across the network then a second partition/VHDX is set up for that task to keep them separate.

With the inclusion of FSLogix with RDS CALs/SALs now it's a no-brainer, IMNSHO, to set the project up on the FSLogix version.

Storage management is another reason why UPDs on a network or separate partition make sense. Keeping a local profile on the C:\ of the session host is messy and can cause issues down the road with users coming and going.

As far as the Broker/Gateway/Web put those roles on one VM but separate from the Session Host.

@scottalanmiller said in Microsoft Office - Licensing Questions For 3 Scenarios:

@flaxking said in Microsoft Office - Licensing Questions For 3 Scenarios:

I think you must be missing what's going on here. This removes the requirement to integrate more directly with MS Office, instead relying on a separate library that is provided standalone from Office and thus allows saving to Excel. We've had zero issues with using this library, which is actually pretty uncommon for us.

The issue is flexibility. Using third party libraries, you can integrate with Excel or with anything else. Using the Office libraries, every user, in ever system, is bound by the limitations of the most problematic. It makes deployments more costly, and more complex.

That's true, it's the kind of self perpetuating lock-in that has served Microsoft so well. People use Excel, and they ask for saving to Excel spreadsheet, so we create the integration specially to allow Excel and not include ODF, then we help keep the industry locked into using Excel because that's all we support unless you want to just save to CSV.

As for the cost and complexity of deployments... that could be true, except that the installation of our main software is already so complex and costly that dealing with potentially installing this library is the easiest part. I think we probably only have one other developer who would be able to figure out how to install it. I've never heard of any client's IT that have been able to figure out how to install it (just calls from those who have tried), client services has to do literally every install.

@JasGot said in Updated - Connecting to 1 Site With Separate Logins/Several IPs:

@wrx7m said in [Updated - Connecting to 1 Site With Separate Logins/Several IPs]>

This works on Windows 10 (1703, 1809, 1903), Server 2016 (1607), Server 2012 R2 and Server 2008 R2.

Tor is another option. Proxies are already out there.

Lots of guides on setting it up to run multiple browsers from different IPs. We did it years ago for a project and it was perfect. Took a few minutes to setup, but was perfect for the task.

There's even a bash script to do all the setup for you. (Not on Windows, of course)

Thanks. This has been up and running via squid on Fedora for several months and works really well.

@black3dynamite said in Remote Desktop to Fedora 28?:

@dafyre said in Remote Desktop to Fedora 28?:

@black3dynamite said in Remote Desktop to Fedora 28?:

@dafyre said in Remote Desktop to Fedora 28?:

@fuznutz04 said in Remote Desktop to Fedora 28?:

@dafyre I didn't ever get back to needing this until now. How were you able to achieve this? I use Fedora 28 and the Cinnamon desktop.

Sadly, no, I haven't. From what I can tell, Fedora 28 (probably 29 too) use Wayland by default. I haven't found a way to get it working yet. I tried switching the Login Screen to use X first, but even that didn't help.

Have you tried disabling Wayland instead?

I hadn't thought about that. I'll have to do a fresh install and see how that's done, unless there's a working VNC Server package in Fedora 29...

Just edit /etc/gdm/custom.conf and uncomment WaylandEnable=false and then restart. You will have only two options GNOME and GNOME Classic.

That gets me one step closer. I can get XRDP to connect to the local VNC server, but the user has to log in (locally) first... :face_with_cold_sweat:

not having much luck...... It's Friday so giving up till Monday/Tuesday 🙂