Parallels Remote Application Server (RAS) Reviews

Alternative to Windows RDS (terminal services) supporting internal staff and remote access.

Simplifies external connections with community-based organizations by allowing us to publish applications to them, accessible by current-generation HTML5 browser or OS-specific client (Windows, Android, iOS), and supporting popular single sign-on and multi-factor authentication protocols.

Comparable performance to Citrix for our use case at a significantly lower cost. Straightforward installation and capable management front-end.

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).

No issues with stability.

None so far, but we plan a major expansion toward the end of 2018.

We have not needed much technical support. We generally find what we need in the provided documentation or the user forums. When we have requested help, the response has been consistent with other vendors of this type (we are not on an expedited service plan).

I have used Citrix in previous organizations with good results but I lacked the budget to acquire Citrix for this implementation.

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.

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.

Citrix, Windows RDS.

Take advantage of the trial version so that you can check out its feature set first-hand, get a sense of its performance on your hardware and over your network.

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.

Remote app.

Enables deployment of remote apps from a central location.

Ease of use in publishing apps and installing the agent. The Interface is fairly intuitive after some tinkering. Although I inherited the app only two-thirds deployed, I was able to complete the deployment and service it over the last year without referring to any documentation.

Other valuable features include the ability to set up security groups for accessing certain apps, the ability to add apps easily and centrally without touching the servers they’re hosted on. There are other features which we have not taken advantage of yet, but I’m sure will prove useful.

• Customer support
• Ease of end-user use

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.

Currently in the RD Session Hosts – Sessions section, I can see what server a user is logged into but not what app he is using. Being able to do so would be immensely helpful when a non-technical user is complaining of issues, but I can’t tell which app he is using, and he is actually logged into multiple servers since they serve multiple apps.

No issues with stability.

No issues with scalability.

I would rate my experience with tech support as "middling" - difficult to open a ticket, and support is located on the opposite side of the world, so schedules don't mesh.

Work with the vendor, as this is a fairly new product and they want use cases. Deals can be made.

Test extensively, especially with custom-built apps, as these can have issues, though overall the experience is smooth.

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.

We are using it through the ProLiant ERP solution.

Its price and ease of use are the most valuable. It is simple and has good performance.

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, such as VMware or Citrix, it would be great if they can provide an automated migration solution.

I have been using this solution for two months.

Its stability is very good.

Its scalability is good. We have around 30 users.

Their technical support is very good. I would rate them a ten out of ten.

The initial setup was a little bit complex because we were migrating from Citrix, but we got help from them all the time. The deployment took about two days.

It is very affordable.

To use it, it is important that you have a requirement to deploy on the cloud. It is not the right solution for on-premises deployments. It is the right solution for cloud deployments. It has a very affordable price and the highest capabilities. It is really good.

I would rate this solution a ten out of ten.

We use it for remote application installation in Terminal Servers.

Maintenance of software versions has been greatly simplified, ensuring that all users are using the same version of applications.

The ease with which you can publish applications to different groups of users, by integrating with Windows Active Directory.

All areas of the product could be improved especially for the IT department, facilitating the deployment of applications and their maintenance. They also need to offer more options, flexibility, and to keep the price as low as possible.

We have encountered stability issues at times, but they have been resolved with updates.

No issues with scalability.

Technical support is quite good. I would rate it at eight out of 10.

Straightforward. Our vendor did it.

We evaluated Microsoft RemoteApp, but it was more expensive and more difficult to configure.

Make sure the initial installation is done by a vendor.

My main use is for remote control for enterprise applications. 

The most valuable feature is the HTML 5 Client, which makes it convenient to work from outside the office.

In the next release, I would like to have two-factor authentication with Microsoft.

I've been working with this solution for six to seven years.

The stability is ok - once I finished the setup, the system was quite stable.

It is scalable, but sometimes you need to understand how to use load balancing and the gateway in order to scale, which means the team may need some additional technical knowledge.

The setup is simple and took a few days. 

I implemented using an in-house team. 

I don't like the subscription model because it feels like I have to pay every month. If Parallels could go back to the professional license, it would be much better.

I would rate this solution as nine out of ten.