We performed a comparison between Microsoft Virtual Server and Parallels Remote Application Server (RAS) based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Virtualization solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."I appreciate the ease and speed with which I can set up and manage virtual machines using Microsoft Virtual Server."
"The product provides flexibility."
"Microsoft Virtual Server is a highly scalable solution."
"The tool is perfectly stable."
"The most valuable feature is the stability of the solution."
"The product helps us secure VMs from vulnerabilities in our systems like Sentinel. It indicates the threat via email notification."
"It is an expensive platform. I rate its pricing an eight out of ten."
"The solution's performance is good."
"Setup was straightforward. Our particular use case involved an Active Directory forest involving two data centers and three domains. User authentication against Active Directory was the easiest to set up and validate of any application installed in the last three years."
"We can publish apps and desktops on Terminal Servers and seamlessly share printers. We also combine Parallels with Deepnet Security to get two-factor authentication."
"It permits us to control the applications that our users are able to get to, in a seamless manner. We're able to distribute applications to users' desktops, just like those applications are on each user's computer, but they're not."
"Its price and ease of use are the most valuable. It is simple and has good performance."
"We use RAS to publish cloud desktops to our clients. The ability to easily publish resources to a subset of users is what we find most valuable."
"It has allowed us to centralize the software location so we don't have to update the software client on 70 computers."
"Simplicity of the interface is a valuable feature."
"Client compatibility with many systems makes it very versatile. The reporting that is included is awesome."
"While I am generally satisfied with the solution, it could slightly improve its stability."
"The pricing and scalability are areas of the product with shortcomings where improvements are required."
"The solution's user interface could be improved."
"The platform’s dashboard features could be better."
"The product must provide easier rollouts."
"Microsoft Virtual Server should improve its network performance."
"The bandwidth to Singapore could be scaled better."
"As certain medium-level complexities are involved in the product's setup process, the product's setup phase can be considered for improvement."
"From a seller's point of view, there are a lot of things that they could do better in the sales cycle."
"A web-based management interface for administration and reporting would be nice, instead of needing to log into a remote server."
"The solution's application virtualization feature needs improvement."
"Opening a ticket should be available from the actual RAS console. It is cumbersome to go to a portal, hunt around for five minutes for a link to open a ticket, answer questions meant to direct you towards FAQs instead of live support, then fill out information (license #, version #, etc.) which could more easily be supplied by sending a ticket straight from the console with all of that information automatically specified."
"The product does not utilize SQL for reporting purposes. Also, it does not support some hypervisors similar to Citrix. These particular areas need improvement."
"Generally, it is a very good solution. The main thing that I would improve is their presence here in Mexico. They don't have strong local support here in Mexico. They should have a worldwide presence so that we don't have to do everything through the people in the US. The initial setup was a little bit complex because we were migrating from Citrix. For customers who are migrating from another platform like VMware or Citrix, it would be great if they can provide an automated migration solution."
"If the solution crashes, then all the customers connected through that agent, lose their session."
"Parallels Remote Application Server (RAS) is an expensive solution, and its pricing could be improved."
More Parallels Remote Application Server (RAS) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Microsoft Virtual Server is ranked 3rd in Application Virtualization with 31 reviews while Parallels Remote Application Server (RAS) is ranked 5th in Application Virtualization with 24 reviews. Microsoft Virtual Server is rated 8.2, while Parallels Remote Application Server (RAS) is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Microsoft Virtual Server writes "Has a good interface but needs to improve in areas like pricing and scalability". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Parallels Remote Application Server (RAS) writes "Provides good scalability and a secure environment". Microsoft Virtual Server is most compared with , whereas Parallels Remote Application Server (RAS) is most compared with Microsoft Remote Desktop Services, Citrix DaaS (formerly Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops service), Citrix Workspace, VMware Workstation and Parallels Desktop. See our Microsoft Virtual Server vs. Parallels Remote Application Server (RAS) report.
See our list of best Application Virtualization vendors.
We monitor all Application Virtualization reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
