Evaluating RDM
Hello guys,
I am evaluating RDM currently, and as a result playing around with it, a lot. Since i am experimenting, mainly with the basics: setting up a structure, security, available types, documenting, etc... and i have a few remarks/questions i'd like to inform you about. But first and farmost: i like it, a lot - improvement is always possible however. So i'd be willing to take some time to write this down. The core functionality is good - adding a structure - adding connections.
Adapting to new software is one thing, but intuition is also important, as it tends to drive a logical order in which things can be done. As far as this goes, i've noticed the following:
A few examples:
Flexibility in adding quick text
I have a folderstructure worked out, a folder "Suppliers", below it a have a supplier "Remmicom" added as Contact --> Supplier. The dashboard shows me the overview, with (mainly) whitespace. Now i have to edit Properties, goto more, add Text, Url or RTF and it gets in added with HTML code characters... I'm pretty confident this is not as it should be. One could easily think of an embedded editor that fills up the whitespace (see my OneDrive, i edited one to Include an example rich text editor directly).
See https://1drv.ms/f/s!Amoqlb_rdzhQjdMT0kev7W_iTGBSjw for the screenshots i took and examples i present.
Working with documents (PDF, Excel, Word, ...)
Working with documents is doable, but uneasy. One has to know the caveats that come with this. Let me clarify.
If you right mouse click on a folder and do: Add --> Document you get a list with document types that can be added (good). If you right mouse click another type that is not a folder (for example to a Contact) you cannot add it as a Sub connection. The options can be clicked, but the list with document types, is quite simply: empty.
These are all the ways (maybe i'm forgetting some):
Next to that: a document can be added to a folder, in various ways - linked to the document, saved into the database, etc... The shortcut key CTRL + S for quick saving, does not work in embedded mode.
Conclusion
In the case of integrating a good document management, there are a ton of options available. The amount of types and available options, together with the way they are implemented make it hard to get up and running - in a good way. The sheer amount of available types is overwhelming, and is confusing. The overdone reuse of classes to implement new types are very visible and hindering focus on what matters at that moment.
The basics are seemingly good, but it is a bit disappointing to see how some things have been implemented. Although there is more, i'll keep it at this for now.
But again: the basics are good - setting up a structure, adding connections of all types, including web-based connections with or without auto-login (requires addins), connections to external programs (like SSMS) work great.
All Comments (7)
Hello,
Thank you for your feedback. It's already possible to hide some types/connections in the Data Source Settings (Type->Availability). We are aware that there is multiple way of adding document/note and we try to simplify it. For example, RDM 13 will support a documentation editor:
https://blog.devolutions.net/2017/10/remote-desktop-manager-13-sneak-peek-documentation-editor.html
And it will no longer be possible to use RTF format and the description will be keep simple. The note in Information will disappear as well.
Could you give a try to RDM 13 beta?
Regards
David Hervieux
Hi David,
Thank you for the response. I want to try version 13 beta indeed. Where can i download the bits 'n pieces please?
EDIT: thank you, found the beta. Just read up on what's expected in this version, which i did not know about until now.
Hi,
You can download the beta here:
https://forum.devolutions.net/topic28342-remote-desktop-manager--beta.aspx?MessageID=108304#post108304
The database is backward compatible as long as you don't use the newly created entry type like TFTP, Google Drive...
Regards
David Hervieux
David,
Thank you. I've tested and played around with it. The good thing imho is that there is now a structural implemented documentation tool.
Although in my opinion the markup editor is a missed opportunity... why not implement a fully fledged WYSIWYG-editor? Hell, even some of those editors can paste Word documents pretty good - although not perfect. In this case i can paste in, but have to markup everything from scratch.
But even besides that - this isn't just 2017/2018 anymore - i'd seriously thought we ran past the markup editors by now for some serious documentation purposes. Yet this seems to prove otherwise, and this is not a good thing.
Let's take a example out of one of your competitors: Royal TS, who has implemented a really good and nice WYSIWYG-editor. An example of this can be seen here: https://1drv.ms/f/s!Amoqlb_rdzhQjdMT0kev7W_iTGBSjw
And let us be honest: it is just a lot more joyfull to work with a good WYSIWYG-editor for documenting purposes instead of a markup-editor.
With regards,
Sven
I understand you point. I will check what we can do for the WYSIWYG but we have to keep the mark down since our application is cross-platform. The documentation can be displayed in DVLS (Web), RDM Mac, RDM Windows, RDM iOS and RDM Android. We use to have the same kind of editor but it was for RTF and this format is not compatible everywhere.
Regards
David Hervieux
Thank you David
There are more then enough good cross platform WYSIWYG editors on the market, that can produce good, clean (cross-platform) documents in various formats - to name only one: Quill and there are a bunch more.
Furthermore i am pretty confident that although it is cross-platform, the secondary platforms (android, win Phone, iOS) are often primarely used for reference purposes instead of full fledged rich applications where all functionality is equally present as in the Win64 apps.
There no way you have to agree with me - but a non WYSIWYG-editor is a absolute no-go for me. But i can understand choices have to be made, and i do not make them :)
With regards,
Sven
Thank you. I will definitively take a look at Quill.
Regards
David Hervieux