Parallels Remote Application Server (RAS) Reviews

It is our primary remote access solution for remote desktop.

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.

• Easy to install
• Super stable
• Easy to manage

It's a really good product. There's not a lot that needs improving, and we're on an older version. I imagine the newer versions are better but we have not had a single need to improve anything.

No issues with stability.

No issues with scalability.

We have asked for help from tech support and their service was good.

Citrix. We switched because Citrix is complicated and expensive.

We had them assist us with the setup and I think that's important. When rolling out a product like this, the vendor should want to help implement, so it's implemented correctly. We used them to implement it, and that's the way it's been running since we started.

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.

Licensing should always, in my opinion, be on a per-user, per-month basis. I would like to be able to add one user, take one user off. That would be the ideal, to be able to supply this as a service.

Citrix and the native Microsoft Remote Desktop. The latter is very hard it is to install, and makes us mad.

Everything can be improved, so I give it an eight out of 10. It does everything we need it to do, it's stable; with the caveat that there is no perfect solution.

If you're doing a thin-client environment, where you want to publish applications, then of all the products on the market right now, this is the product to use.

To provide applications to Macs and standalone Windows machines, also Linux and Android devices from appsanywhere.

Allows our Cloudpaging applications to be delivered to non-Windows machines all via our standard portal which is appsanywhere.

Its integration with Cloudpaigng and AppsAnywhere. 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, macOS, iOS, Android, Linux, Xbox One, PS4 - just by ticking a box. 

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 that the screen size on these devices is so small that, unless there is some scaling option, it is not really usable. 

No stability issues yet.

No scalability issues yet.

Technical support is very good..

The setup was done by the vendor and seemed straigtforward.

Run a trial and see if it meets your requirements.

We use the product as a VDI to share a desktop for the client portal. It helps employees and the client to access it simultaneously.

We can provision the servers without the need for another third-party solution.

The product does not utilize SQL for reporting purposes. Also, it does not support some hypervisors similar to Citrix. These particular areas need improvement.

We have been using Parallels Remote Application Server (RAS) for one and a half years.

It is a stable platform.

It is a scalable platform.

The technical support services need improvement.

Neutral

Citrix is suitable for big companies. It is difficult to set up and requires a certified technician with two Citrix certifications for easier deployment. They charge around $ 4,000 to $ 5,000 for training programs. In contrast, Parallels provides free training and can provision servers without integrating with third-party vendors.

The initial setup is simple. I rate the process a nine out of ten.

The product is not expensive. I rate its pricing a three or four out of ten.

I rate Parallels Remote Application Server (RAS) an eight out of ten.

It works. It is easy to install and easy to use. 

You have the opportunity to virtualize applications in different locations. Everything is in one pane or one window, which is quite good.

Too much Active Directory dependent

We've been working with this solution for about five years.

It is scalable, and you also get high availability included.

Technical support has worked any time we needed it. We always got it.

Positive

We worked mostly with remote control. For support reasons, we remote control solutions. We also used RDP, but back then, it was quite rudimental. It is an improvement over Microsoft RDP. Actually, it uses RDP in the background, but it is sleeker to use.

We are also working with Virtuozzo and Jelastic, and we are actually looking at combining them at the moment.

It is quite easy. It is not complex.

Good!

It is not that high. It is in the medium range. Of course, it could be lower, but the price is not the issue.

If you don't want to install it yourself, it is also available as a service from many providers. We're a reseller and an MSP, and we tell smaller customers that they can have it as a service as well.

I would rate Parallels Remote Application Server (RAS) an eight out of 10. It works, and it is fulfilling the function.

Providing load balancing to our RDS infrastructure, publishing RDS applications and desktops.

Accelerates deployment of thin clients and remote desktop servers in the farm.

• 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.
• Client management is easy.

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.

There have been a few stability issues, mainly around configuration.

I use GPO preferences to push configuration of Windows 10 thin client parameters for Parallels. Each device can have status “managed” in Parallels, meaning that the client is managed by the administration console and policies are applied. But these thin clients were not able to be managed because we discovered that we had already installed the RAS client on the SysPrep-ed machine, and a registry setting was used by Parallels to know the client’s MAC address. This MAC address was the same for all clients and the SysPrep-ed machine, so communication between newly installed clients and the administration server was not possible.

I had to create a script to collect the client’s MAC address during login and replace the registry value with it.

No issues with scalability.

Technical support is an eight out of 10.

Native remote desktop.

The initial setup was of medium complexity. We initially purchased a RAS server to provide more advanced load balancing capabilities between our remote desktop servers. This configuration was quite simple. We added another gateway server later and that was straightforward too.

Pricing is good.

Read the manual.

We are an MSP and use Parallels RAS as the client gateway for accessing our cloud platform.

Allows staff to work from anywhere with an internet connection, on just about any connected device.

Stability and reliability. Because our clients use this as the way to access their work every day, and we use it to support them, we need to know it won't let us or them down.

We have been working with the Parallels team on some printing issues and are hopeful they will be resolved in the next patch release.

We only encountered a stability issue with version 13 but that was quickly updated and repaired.

No scalability issues so far. We have supported thousands of concurrent users.

Technical support has always been great. They will work through any issue until it is resolved and have been very knowledgeable about their product. We have seen a number of issues we have raised over the years become features or fixes in the next update.

Citrix and native RDS. Citrix was more costly for a product that was no better and RDS has had a number of limitations over the years.

Initial setup was straightforward. If you have a multi-site farm and multiple levels of redundancy, it does add complexity, but less than any other products I have used.

The pricing has always been competitive, and the new SPLA licensing model works great for our business and clients.

Citrix, MS RDS, and Ericom Blaze. We also do keep an eye on the other products in the market to make sure we are always providing the best solution for our clients.

Install a demo and give it a go. It is very quick and will generally be all you need to be converted to a user of Parallels RAS.

We have some systems in a secret zone of our network. With Parallels, it's easy to publish an app or a desktop to users.

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 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.

We have encountered stability issues at times. Some updates are not good and are followed by a new update soon after.

We have had issues with scalability but we do not use a load balancer.

We have not used tech support often but it has been good in the cases where we had to use them.

It's easier to set up and use than Citrix. We also switched because Parallels was more cost-effective and supported our requirements better.

The initial setup is straightforward, but ours was more complex to meet all our needs.

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.

Read the docs, do a test, and plan well.

Cloud-hosted desktop.

We use RAS for customer solutions.

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.

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. 

It would be great if there were more sophisticated GPO templates/options.

From time to time, we have had issues with stability. However, this could be related to connectivity at client sites. 

We also have regular issues with printers disappearing from sessions.

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.

In my limited dealings with support, they have been responsive, respectful, and helpful.

We were previously using Citrix. We changed for a number of reasons: 

1. We acquired a cloud company which was already using Parallels. 
2. Cost.

The initial setup was straightforward.

Parallels is a cost effective alternative to Citrix.

We evaluated Citrix and Microsoft Remote Desktop Services (MS RDS).

Understand what you want to get out of the product.