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."The solution's performance is good."
"The product is reliable."
"It is stable and easy to use."
"The tool's most valuable feature is its workload. Its integration with Microsoft products is good."
"We use the solution for internal business purposes."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to share folders and run Active Directory."
"It is a scalable solution...I followed some online tutorials, because of which I did not face any technical issues or the need to contact the solution's technical support."
"The dashboard is valuable to us."
"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."
"It is a stable solution."
"Allows us to publish applications accessible by current-generation HTML5 browser or OS-specific client (Windows, Android, iOS), and it supports popular single sign-on and multi-factor authentication protocols."
"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."
"You have the opportunity to virtualize applications in different locations. Everything is in one pane or one window, which is quite good."
"It is robust. We have some 75 users using it and it doesn't lag. It's very speedy."
"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."
"The interface should be improved."
"The tool must provide updates less frequently."
"It would be good if the tool's integration improved."
"The solution’s stability could be improved."
"Support could always be a bit better."
"The security performance and cost."
"The response time from technical support could be faster."
"While I am generally satisfied with the solution, it could slightly improve its stability."
"Parallels Remote Application Server (RAS) is an expensive solution, and its pricing could be improved."
"If the solution crashes, then all the customers connected through that agent, lose their session."
"We use several gateways because access to our secret zone requires two-factor user authentication. It is a lot of hassle differentiating among users with or without two-factor. Of course, we could use two farms, but that would mean more management too."
"Improvement is needed in performance monitoring of the client's endpoint, and automatic re-connection of the client in the event of circuit disruptions (this works well generally but can present challenges)."
"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."
"Since I've been here less than a year, I have had to upgrade the system three times. The first time was the major upgrade but they have upgraded twice since, and I think that's too many times in that time span."
"The solution's application virtualization feature needs improvement."
"The product does not utilize SQL for reporting purposes. Also, it does not support some hypervisors similar to Citrix. These particular areas need improvement."
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.
