Compare Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops vs. Parallels Remote Application Server (RAS)

Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops is ranked 1st in Application Virtualization with 11 reviews while Parallels Remote Application Server (RAS) is ranked 2nd in Application Virtualization with 7 reviews. Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops is rated 8.8, while Parallels Remote Application Server (RAS) is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops writes "Provides flexibility in the architecture but it needs better integration into other environments ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Parallels Remote Application Server (RAS) writes "Allowed us to centralize our software, making scalability and updates easier". Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops is most compared with VMware Horizon View, TeamViewer, Microsoft App-V, Microsoft Remote Desktop Services and Nutanix Xi Frame, whereas Parallels Remote Application Server (RAS) is most compared with Microsoft Remote Desktop Services, VMware Horizon View, NComputing vSpace, NVIDIA GRID and Microsoft App-V. See our Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops vs. Parallels Remote Application Server (RAS) report.
Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Most Helpful Review
Find out what your peers are saying about Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops vs. Parallels Remote Application Server (RAS) and other solutions. Updated: July 2020.
419,792 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Quotes From Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros
I found the ease of deployment, scalability, and security to be to our benefit when supplying virtual applications to our clients.You can connect to any printer, and from anywhere you can print documents using a compressed channel. It is easy and the bandwidth is very low.This is a very stable solution which you can feel confident using.Stable product with straightforward setup.XenApp is a fast, secure and reliable solution for remote connections that is completely different than and superior to older Windows solutions.The most valuable feature is the automatic software upgrades because they take place on only three or four servers, rather than on 50 or 60 machines.The shadow feature is extraordinary and helps a lot when supporting remote users.The scalability is fine. We have about 400 users, who are supported by six staff members. We use the product company-wide throughout 40 different locations, and we currently do not have plans to increase the scale of use.

More Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops Pros »

We use Cloudpaging to package and deploy the vast majority of our applications to our standard Windows 10 desktops. With the use of Parallels integration into Software2 AppsAnywhere hub, this means we can use the same packages to deliver Windows applications to almost any device - Windows, mac OS, iOS, Android, Linux, Xbox One, PS4 - just by ticking a box.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.It has allowed us to centralize the software location so we don't have to update the software client on 70 computers.The most valuable feature is the ease with which you can publish applications to different groups of users, by integrating with Windows Active Directory.It provides flexible access to Windows applications from many types of devices.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.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 management capability from the RAS portal provides greater control than using pure MS inbuilt into RDS capabilities.

More Parallels Remote Application Server (RAS) Pros »

Cons
There are a lot of shortfalls with supporting printing over XenApp.Citrix has to support all of the hypervisors including KVM and OpenStack KVM.The product should expand its capabilities for integrating with other environments.For us, pricing is the most important feature to improve.Pricing can be lower and roaming profiles need to be fixed to work consistently.We would like to be able to provide VDI, a full desktop, to each of our users.Direct connection of USB devices on the terminals to be used by streamed applications is very important for printing and the usage of token authentication, but the current version does not support this one hundred percent.The monitoring and management is in need of improvement.

More Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops Cons »

It needs Windows scaling on Android/iOS devices. At present, the concept of delivering apps to Android and iOS devices is appealing, but the reality is the screen size on these devices is so small that, unless there is some scaling option, it is not really usable.HALB is not stable in our environment. When running two HALBs we have stability problems, so we use an active one and a passive for backup. Also, it would be nice to implement an upgrade of the environment without having to stop the servers. As it is, this must be done during off-hours.The main issue we have with all of our users is printing. Randomly, a printer will disconnect or someone won't connect to it and I will have to reset the print service and then nobody can print. That's the big headache we've had over the course of the five years.A web-based management interface for administration and reporting would be nice, instead of needing to log into a remote server.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.It would be great if there were more sophisticated GPO templates/options.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.

More Parallels Remote Application Server (RAS) Cons »

Pricing and Cost Advice
A perpetual enterprise license costs approximately $300 USD.I suggest using the concurrent user licensing scheme.I think it is a little high priced.It is quite expensive, but so are the competitors on the market.

More Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops Pricing and Cost Advice »

I recommend testing Parallels and comparing it to your needs. Compare the prices against what you are able to do with the product and its alternatives. Parallels is not a cheap product.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.Parallels is a cost effective alternative to Citrix.

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.
419,792 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Ranking
Views
14,914
Comparisons
10,717
Reviews
10
Average Words per Review
473
Avg. Rating
8.7
Views
6,688
Comparisons
3,070
Reviews
7
Average Words per Review
398
Avg. Rating
8.6
Popular Comparisons
Also Known As
XenDesktop, XenApp (Citrix Virtual Apps)Parallels RAS
Learn
Citrix
Parallels
Overview

Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops provide granular access control, advanced system monitoring and an inherently secure architecture by providing remote access to Windows and Linux apps and desktops secured in the datacenter. Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops enable IT to deliver on-demand apps and desktops to any device.

ApplicationServer delivers applications, data and virtual desktops from a central location, providing continuous availability, resource-based load-balancing and complete network transparency.
Offer
Learn more about Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops
Learn more about Parallels Remote Application Server (RAS)
Sample Customers
Exelon, Aeronamic, AIDS Healthcare Foundation, Alameda County Medical Center, Alaska Department of Fish & Game, Aloysius Stichting, Amarchand Mangaldas, AmBev, Amnet Technology Solutions, ArvalArsari 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
REVIEWERS
Energy/Utilities Company14%
Financial Services Firm14%
Construction Company10%
Insurance Company10%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Software R&D Company37%
Comms Service Provider13%
K 12 Educational Company Or School6%
Government6%
REVIEWERS
Government20%
Comms Service Provider10%
Construction Company10%
Energy/Utilities Company10%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
K 12 Educational Company Or School19%
Software R&D Company16%
Comms Service Provider13%
Media Company11%
Find out what your peers are saying about Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops vs. Parallels Remote Application Server (RAS) and other solutions. Updated: July 2020.
419,792 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our list of best Application Virtualization vendors and best Virtual Desktop 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.