Feature request / change: Please remove device limit

[ZetaWaves]

This is a feature request to remove the device limit. All of our users connect to random machines to support other's. Now, it has gotten to the point where the software is installed and runs at startup on many computers which whom we rarely connect to. This is filling up our device list and we are hitting the limit daily.

This has become a larger problem / concern now as each time a user's computer is booted up, it creates another device on our device list. Some of these devices were one-time support requests where we installed the client for a one-time use, but it's still installed on the machines as a service by default so it starts automatically every time device is booted.

Simply purging devices isn't cutting it anymore. We need another solution.

[rustdesk]

Apologize, I am stick to https://github.com/rustdesk/rustdesk-server-pro/discussions/182. It won't change because users request, at least at current stage.

[ZetaWaves]

@rustdesk No plans to offer a plan that better fits our needs? Like an unlimited device plan that doesn't cost too much. We will be growing the user count over time, which will result in license upgrades and profit for you guys. :) But, the device limitation just doesn't make sense with how we use the product.

The problem is that when you go to support a remote user, they install the software and now you can't uninstall it without getting booted. It's now going to start every time they start their machine. This will re-register their machine on the server device list each time. We support 40+ machines per day, but only once, and then we never see them again.

The current plan just doesn't fit. It's disabling devices and deleting a machine to free up another just isn't working anymore.

The free version of RustDesk doesn't have this limitation, why does the paid version? It's already a paid subscription on a yearly basis. I just don't understand. RustDesk Pro is so close to being perfect for our needs, this is the last hurdle. :(

[rustdesk]

We support 40+ machines per day, but only once, and then we never see them again.

That's why I give you https://github.com/rustdesk/rustdesk-server-pro/discussions/182#discussioncomment-9083837

[ZetaWaves]

@rustdesk I understand. I'm currently using that script, however, it seems I'm hitting the limit daily even when clearing out entries every 3 hours. The problem is that the devices cannot be cleared if they're actively connected. Many of the user's we have supported in the past have never removed the client so when their machine is booted up, it's connected.

The script really helped for quite awhile, but now it seems the problem is the device limit.

I have the script set now to remove devices every 15 mins and even then it is not enough. I'm still getting disabled device entries.

[rustdesk]

If it is used only once, why do you ask them install it? why not given them a quick-support version having installation disabled? I believe they will close it after use.

[ZetaWaves]

@rustdesk installation is required for UAC to work properly unattended. We have issues installing our software for users when UAC is prompted, so our process has always been to install the client.

[rustdesk]

not installed version can also elevate for UAC. The user can click on "Accept and Elevate" on incoming connection window, the controlling side can also request elevation from the menu of remote window.

[ZetaWaves]

@rustdesk Many times the user on the other end is not in front of the machine so we almost always use ID & password authentication. For some reason this doesn't appear to elevate properly.

[rustdesk]

This is not one time use case.

[ZetaWaves]

@rustdesk It is. They send us the information (the ID & password) and then usually walk away and do other things. It would be a problem to bother them every time we need to elevate which is why we have always had the user install the client. We would likely be interrupted in our process to install our program and would have to wait until user gets back to machine which could take hours in some cases so it would be a huge time waste.

TeamViewer is what we used to use and it elevated automatically regardless of being installed or not. That's what we have been used to.

We install our software that we make on the user's machine and then they take the machine and sell it. We usually never see it again unless the user wants something else which is rare.

I hope this makes sense. Just trying to explain my situation.

[rustdesk]

We install our software that we make on the user's machine and then they take the machine and sell it. We usually never see it again unless the user wants something else which is rare.

$0.01 per month is too expensive for you in this case? Or we can give you a big discount if you really have a lot of devices in this case? Or you can find cheaper solution for your case in the market?

Even more you can use free OSS and Pro together to save money.

[ZetaWaves]

@rustdesk It's not too expensive. Actually, I find your pricing very fair. However, in this case, the amount of devices will just grow over time and we are still making the same amount of money.

For example, we are supporting more and more devices on a temporary basis over time. Eventually I'd be at a 1000+ device license which would be way out of the price bracket for what I do.

So, in context, $0.01 per device is very affordable, but these devices are not managed devices, they're temporary support devices. So I will continue to pay for them over time forever even though I never connect back to them again.

That's why I was asking for a different solution. I'm not opposed to paying for a different plan that makes more sense for the use-case that I'm in. It seems this product may be more focused for business environments that use it to manage their own workstations and not a TeamViewer-alternative in the context of remote support.

[rustdesk]

The problem is, there is no way to know it is managed or temporray support in your case.

If it is only temporray support, re-enable operation is really hard for you?

[ZetaWaves]

@rustdesk I know, that's the problem I'm facing.

Your product is great, much better and faster than TeamViewer. I just wish it fit our use case. I feel like it's very close to fitting how we use it, but this was one thing that was missing.

Re-enable operation? What do you mean by that?

[rustdesk]

Re-enable operation? What do you mean by that?

You can disable these devices with the script. When you need to support it, you enable it.

[rustdesk]

You can also make these devices connected to free OSS version.

[ZetaWaves]

@rustdesk I have 5 other coworkers who have the "controlling" part of the client. They are the ones who remote in most of the time to support our customers. Problem is, I don't always know which ID's are still being used and which one's are not. They're connecting to so many daily that it's hard to keep track.

I may try to disable devices over time, but that has already caused a problem with someone who had to jump back on to fix a mistake. The device was disabled and I received a call in the middle of the night.

So yes, it is possible to disable the devices. I have been doing that the last few weeks.

I'm just wondering though, why does OSS have no device limit but pro does?

I can understand a user limitation, but why a device limitation?

Is this product really meant for businesses who manage their own machines?

Teamviewer is advertised as mainly a remote support tool that's what I thought RustDesk was.

I used the free version in the past, but I wanted to support the developers and company here, plus I love the web interface and custom clients are great.

I just wish you guys had a plan with no device limit or had a way to mark devices as managed or not managed.

[rustdesk]

How TeamViewer handle your case?

[ZetaWaves]

@rustdesk We had a Teamviewer Business plan. A step down from the Premium Plan. For managed devices, it was 300. However, you can connect and install the custom client on unlimited machines and connect to any of them anytime with no limitation. The only limitation they have that you guys do not is the simultaneous connections.

TeamViewer defined a "managed device" as a device that is stored in the address book for ease of access. It also had other features, such as, patching windows clients with windows updates remotely and other things like that for managed devices only.

However, for us, we didn't use any of those features. We just used it for remote support. The amount of connections was the limitation we had the largest problem with. The price was slightly higher than yours for a similar package.

For example, Teamviewer was $21.90/month for the plan I had where yours is $19.90/month. I believe TeamViewer at this current time is priced higher than when I first signed up. Keep in mind though that TeamViewer hosted everything. With RustDesk, we host it and pay hosting costs.

I believe RustDesk is a superior product overall though. TeamViewer is more expensive and slower for everyday use.

[rustdesk]

Thanks, I will evaluate my decision again.

[ZetaWaves]

@rustdesk Thank you for taking the time to talk to me as well. I really appreciate it. :)

[rustdesk]

We do not have concurrent connection limit, so we add device limit. We can not take user limit as concurrent connection limit, because compared with concurrent connection limit, our user is too cheap.

[ZetaWaves]

@rustdesk Yes, not having the concurrent connection limit is one of the best things about RustDesk.

[ZetaWaves]

@rustdesk So I have changed my custom clients to disable installation. However, elevation only works properly if I change the name to _QS.exe at the end.

Is there a setting that can be used to automatically do this regardless of the name of the executable? I want to avoid a situation where a user renames the executable and then it's not automatically elevating anymore.

Also, it seems "Privacy Mode" and "Block User Input" do not work unless client is installed.

[Mhalkyo]

Hello, we use a lot of devices but we connect very rarely on some. Is there a solution to not have certain posts in the list? Maybe with an option in the executable to disable the addition in the managed devices. A bit like what anydesk can offer in its personalized client by disabling the addition of certain devices in the address book.

This is one of the only things I have a problem with on rustdesk, because otherwise the application is great and brings together exactly the elements that my company wants.