Microsoft App-V vs Parallels Remote Application Server (RAS) comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Comparison Buyer's Guide
Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between Microsoft App-V and Parallels Remote Application Server (RAS) based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about Citrix, Microsoft, VMware and others in Application Virtualization.
To learn more, read our detailed Application Virtualization Report (Updated: March 2024).
768,886 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Featured Review
Dan Patriche
AJ Hartenberg
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
"It is very easy to use from an administration point of view.""The most interesting and powerful feature for us is the fact that we can upgrade any kind of app instantly."

More Microsoft App-V Pros →

"We can provision the servers without the need for another third-party solution.""It is a stable solution.""Its price and ease of use are the most valuable. It is simple and has good performance.""Simplicity of the interface is a valuable feature.""Thin client management (Windows 10 client) provides an easy way to lock down client connection to the remote infrastructure. Policies are very helpful for preconfiguring client behavior. Finally, client management is easy.""The most valuable feature is the ease with which you can publish applications to different groups of users, by integrating with Windows Active Directory.""The solution is powerful, and it has good speed and 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."

More Parallels Remote Application Server (RAS) Pros →

Cons
"The downside is that Microsoft bought this product and they are going to discontinue it in 2026. This is worrisome for us.""If it were possible to integrate App-V with a cybersecurity solution then we could implement a documentation registry, which would be useful."

More Microsoft App-V Cons →

"From a seller's point of view, there are a lot of things that they could do better in the sales cycle.""The product does not utilize SQL for reporting purposes. Also, it does not support some hypervisors similar to Citrix. These particular areas need improvement.""The solution's application virtualization feature needs improvement.""The customization of the web interface could possibly use some improvement. Little things, like being able to place a background image instead of just choosing from a palette of colors, would be nice.""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.""We have had significant, ongoing issues with printing. It would be great to have a best practice for dealing with printing that we can offer to our customers.""We would like the ability to provide a popup message, such as a maintenance notification. That same notification on the Parallels client would be awesome.""We would like to be able to re-label the OTP (One Time Password) popup so our users can easily recognize that they are to put in their DUO code on that line. Most users see OTP and ask what that is."

More Parallels Remote Application Server (RAS) Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "The pricing of this product is competitive."
  • "Clients do not pay licensing fees."
  • More Microsoft App-V Pricing and Cost Advice →

  • "The pricing has always been competitive, and the new SPLA licensing model works great for our business and clients."
  • "I think the new pricing is a little bit high. If the price was lower, we could use it for many more customers. If there was one improvement to be made to this product, it would be a small-business version, at a much lower price point."
  • "Work with the vendor, as this is a fairly new product and they want use cases. Deals can be made."
  • "Comparable performance to Citrix for our use case at a significantly lower cost. Pricing is clear and there are relatively few options or other pricing considerations when compared to similar products. Just be sure not to forget the Microsoft licensing that goes along with a Parallels deployment."
  • "Just compare it to Citrix and you will see the value in it."
  • "Pricing is a little steep."
  • "It justifies the price. In terms of licensing, initially when we got the product it was an unlimited licensing strategy. We knew would grow in the coming years. So initially, we took a plan which had no limit. After a year or so the strategy changed and we were being limited to 105 licenses, that was the minimum... If there was flexibility for increasing the number of licenses that would be great because you never know how much you are going to grow in the next year."
  • "We currently use Parallels side-by-side with an Azure cloud-hosted solution. This may be from a lack of product knowledge on my part, but we still need to work out the most effective way to shut down servers outside of hours, thereby reduce hosting costs. I am not entirely convinced Parallels does this well yet."
  • More Parallels Remote Application Server (RAS) Pricing and Cost Advice →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Virtualization solutions are best for your needs.
    768,886 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Ask a question

    Earn 20 points

    Top Answer:The solution is powerful, and it has good speed and performance.
    Top Answer:The product is not expensive. I rate its pricing a three or four out of ten.
    Top Answer:Parallels Remote Application Server (RAS) is an expensive solution, and its pricing could be improved.
    Ranking
    Views
    2,697
    Comparisons
    1,257
    Reviews
    0
    Average Words per Review
    0
    Rating
    N/A
    Views
    765
    Comparisons
    509
    Reviews
    3
    Average Words per Review
    283
    Rating
    8.0
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    App-V, MS App-V
    Parallels RAS
    Learn More
    Parallels
    Video Not Available
    Overview
    Microsoft Application Virtualization (App-V) enables you to make applications available to end users without installing the applications directly on end user computers. App-V transforms applications into centrally managed services that are never installed and don't conflict with other applications.
    ApplicationServer delivers applications, data and virtual desktops from a central location, providing continuous availability, resource-based load-balancing and complete network transparency.
    Sample Customers
    The University of Texas at San Antonio (UTSA), GDDKiA, P&V, Etisalat Lanka, Hellenic Petroleum
    Arsari Group _ PT Netmarks Indonesia, Izhevsk Elektromekhanicheskiy Zavod (IEMZ) _ Kupol, Abilene Diagnostic Clinic, Fylde Borough Council, YARSTROYREZE LLC, VSK Insurance House, Melenkovsky District of Vladimirskaya Oblast, Sofrigam SA, Antenna International, KingsGate Community Church, Norwegian American Hospital, Island Hotels Group, Medway Council, Medway Council, Voices of September 11th, MacDonald Training Center, Kansas Childrenês Service League, Scope,Next Generation Clubs, WTC Communications, Opera Australia, HSE Integrated, Danier, Bridgwater College, Kern County Mental Health, Tony Tiendas, Spears Manufacturing, Managed Insurance Services Inc., Intuitive Medical Software, M.J. Soffe, Mazda Motors, Israel Military Industries (IMI), Telfair, Upic Solutions, Teleflora, Fisher & Company
    Top Industries
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Financial Services Firm17%
    Computer Software Company11%
    Government11%
    Manufacturing Company6%
    REVIEWERS
    Government15%
    Construction Company15%
    University15%
    Local Government8%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company15%
    Financial Services Firm10%
    Comms Service Provider9%
    Government8%
    Company Size
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business22%
    Midsize Enterprise14%
    Large Enterprise65%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business52%
    Midsize Enterprise8%
    Large Enterprise40%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business29%
    Midsize Enterprise15%
    Large Enterprise55%
    Buyer's Guide
    Application Virtualization
    March 2024
    Find out what your peers are saying about Citrix, Microsoft, VMware and others in Application Virtualization. Updated: March 2024.
    768,886 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    Microsoft App-V is ranked 2nd in Application Virtualization while Parallels Remote Application Server (RAS) is ranked 5th in Application Virtualization with 24 reviews. Microsoft App-V is rated 9.6, while Parallels Remote Application Server (RAS) is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Microsoft App-V writes "Stable, scalable, easy to install, great support, and it upgrades and deploys apps easily". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Parallels Remote Application Server (RAS) writes "Provides good scalability and a secure environment". Microsoft App-V is most compared with VMware ThinApp, Numecent and Citrix DaaS (formerly Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops service), 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 Nerdio.

    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.