RIM Comparison
Looking for the right remote desktop package for your organization? Curious as to what makes Remote Incident Manager (RIM) the first fully accessible option? Let’s break it down by feature, and see how RIM stacks up against the competition.
| Feature | Remote Incident Manager | TeamViewer | QuickAssist | Chrome Remote Desktop | Windows Remote Desktop |
| Remote Accessibility | Fully implemented. Visually impaired technicians can provide assistance to any Windows or Mac lacking a running screen reader | None, remote support impossible without running screen reader on target | None, remote support impossible without running screen reader on target | None, remote support impossible without running screen reader on target | None, remote support impossible without running screen reader on target |
| Installation | Extremely easy one-click installation on Windows, with Mac OS installation as simple as Mac OS will allow | Very complicated installation, especially for people seeking remote support | Built into Windows | Somewhat complicated setup procedure | Built into Windows |
| Updates | Seamless background automatic updates | Requires some user interaction | Updates carried out through Windows Store | Chrome extension updates handled through Chrome, but host component is separate | Updates carried out through the Microsoft Store unless using the version of RDP built-in to Windows |
| UI Accessibility | Full accessibility and usability guaranteed, designed with accessibility in mind from the ground up | Broken accessibility apart from hard-to-find QuickSupport utility | Decent Accessibility | Decent Accessibility | Decent Accessibility |
| Audio | Low-latency high-definition audio by default | High roundtrip latency, unreliable overall | Not enabled by default, bolt-on rather than built-in | Nearly unworkable on cross-platform connections | Extremely high roundtrip latency |
| Voice Communication | Easy to activate, built-in, high quality voice communication | Buggy and harder to activate | Unsupported | Unsupported | Unsupported |
| File Transfers | Copy/paste support when possible, simple and accessible transfer interface to Mac targets | Inaccessible drag-and-drop within a remote session, or separate file transfer session type | Unsupported | One-way only (controller to target) | Not enabled by default, complicated setup procedure |
| Input | Full, unobstructed keyboard and mouse support, screen reader or otherwise | Faltering keyboard support when screen reader is present on the remote computer | Faltering keyboard support when screen reader is present on the remote computer | underdeveloped keyboard support | Faltering keyboard support when screen reader is present on the remote computer |
| Shared Session | Fully supported | Fully supported | Fully supported | Fully supported | Unsupported, separate desktop session forcing target user to log out |
| Unattended Access | Accessible, secure unattended and prompted access sessions that can be configured both within and outside a session | Inaccessible due to UI inaccessibility | Unsupported | Setup procedure more suited for unattended access to personal machines, less secure pin-based access control | Setup procedure is separate from remote session |
| Session Flip | Fully supported, accessible and easy to activate | Unreliable, hard to locate, not always available | Unsupported | Unsupported | Unsupported |
| System Information | Presented in an accessible table that is easy to locate | Inaccessible due to inability to easily access session options via keyboard and screen reader | Inaccessible due to inability to easily access session options via keyboard and screen reader | Inaccessible due to inability to easily access session options via keyboard and screen reader | Inaccessible due to inability to easily access session options via keyboard and screen reader |
| Overall Accessibility Compliance | Fully accessible for users of assistive technology, fully usable by everyone in your workplace. View the RIM VPAT® report | Nearly unusable for users of assistive technology. Does not provide the ability to assist a user lacking a screen reader. Non-compliant. | Decent accessibility for users of assistive technology, but not cross-platform. Still does not provide the ability to assist a user lacking a screen reader. Non-compliant. | Unreliable and unusable for users of assistive technology. Does not provide the ability to assist a user lacking a screen reader. Non-compliant. | Unreliable and unusable for users of assistive technology. Does not provide the ability to assist a user lacking a screen reader. Non-compliant. |
