<a href='https://www.trustradius.com/static/about-trustradius-scoring#question3' target='_blank' rel='nofollow noopener'>Customer Verified: Read more.</a>
Top Rated
148 Ratings
68 Ratings
<a href='https://www.trustradius.com/static/about-trustradius-scoring' target='_blank' rel='nofollow noopener'>trScore algorithm: Learn more.</a>
Score 8.6 out of 100

Parallels RAS

<a href='https://www.trustradius.com/static/about-trustradius-scoring#question3' target='_blank' rel='nofollow noopener'>Customer Verified: Read more.</a>
Top Rated
148 Ratings
<a href='https://www.trustradius.com/static/about-trustradius-scoring' target='_blank' rel='nofollow noopener'>trScore algorithm: Learn more.</a>
Score 9.4 out of 100

Feature Set Ratings

    Application Virtualization

    8.4

    Citrix Virtual Apps (formerly XenApp)

    84%

    Parallels RAS

    Feature Set Not Supported
    N/A
    Citrix Virtual Apps (formerly XenApp) ranks higher in 5/5 features

    Application support

    9.0
    90%
    17 Ratings
    N/A
    0 Ratings

    Device support

    8.0
    80%
    17 Ratings
    N/A
    0 Ratings

    Ease of deployment

    9.0
    90%
    16 Ratings
    N/A
    0 Ratings

    Application packaging

    7.0
    70%
    12 Ratings
    N/A
    0 Ratings

    Security

    9.0
    90%
    17 Ratings
    N/A
    0 Ratings

    Attribute Ratings

    • Citrix Virtual Apps (formerly XenApp) is rated higher in 1 area: Usability
    • Parallels Remote Application Server is rated higher in 2 areas: Likelihood to Recommend, Implementation Rating

    Likelihood to Recommend

    8.5

    Citrix Virtual Apps (formerly XenApp)

    85%
    17 Ratings
    9.4

    Parallels RAS

    94%
    97 Ratings

    Likelihood to Renew

    Citrix Virtual Apps (formerly XenApp)

    N/A
    0 Ratings
    7.1

    Parallels RAS

    71%
    8 Ratings

    Usability

    8.0

    Citrix Virtual Apps (formerly XenApp)

    80%
    1 Rating
    7.7

    Parallels RAS

    77%
    2 Ratings

    Availability

    Citrix Virtual Apps (formerly XenApp)

    N/A
    0 Ratings
    8.4

    Parallels RAS

    84%
    2 Ratings

    Performance

    Citrix Virtual Apps (formerly XenApp)

    N/A
    0 Ratings
    7.5

    Parallels RAS

    75%
    2 Ratings

    Support Rating

    Citrix Virtual Apps (formerly XenApp)

    N/A
    0 Ratings
    8.9

    Parallels RAS

    89%
    145 Ratings

    Online Training

    Citrix Virtual Apps (formerly XenApp)

    N/A
    0 Ratings
    7.5

    Parallels RAS

    75%
    2 Ratings

    Implementation Rating

    7.0

    Citrix Virtual Apps (formerly XenApp)

    70%
    2 Ratings
    7.2

    Parallels RAS

    72%
    4 Ratings

    Product Scalability

    Citrix Virtual Apps (formerly XenApp)

    N/A
    0 Ratings
    8.2

    Parallels RAS

    82%
    1 Rating

    Likelihood to Recommend

    Citrix Virtual Apps (formerly XenApp)

    Citrix Virtual Apps is well suited for environments that require remote access with 25 or more users. It is not appropriate for small sites with 10 or fewer users due to the cost of ownership. Citrix Virtual Apps pricing plus Windows RDS licensing as well is required. Smaller organizations may not find the cost-benefit due to overall costs and/or the cost of managing the environment.
    David Melin | TrustRadius Reviewer

    Parallels RAS

    Standing up a Parallels environment is so incredibly simple compared to other remote desktop solutions I have used over the years. The fact that the gateway is so easy to configure and deploy is a great selling point. Also, love the fact that the licensing model is per concurrent user which makes it very competitive with the other players in the space. In a few years when the rest of my Citrix licensing expires, I will likely migrate the rest of our environment to Parallels and not look back!
    Chris Grogan | TrustRadius Reviewer

    Pros

    Citrix Virtual Apps (formerly XenApp)

    • Excellent for remote satellite users with low bandwidth and high latency connection.
    • Keeps data and applications secure in the data center as users are only getting "screenshots" of the application and mouse/keyboard inputs.
    • Platform agnostic allowing users to access from Apple OSX, iOS, Android devices, Windows, and Linux.
    • Allows increase user density when applications are installed on centralized servers as opposed to on user desktops and laptops.
    Keith Kyaw, MBA, ITIL, CCA | TrustRadius Reviewer

    Parallels RAS

    • Parallels Remote Application Server provides access and published applications to specified users or groups via Active Directory user or group privileges
    • Parallels Remote Application Server provides on the fly remote access via HTML5-Gateway
    • Parallels Remote Application Server provides remote printing service to local printers
    Anonymous | TrustRadius Reviewer

    Cons

    Citrix Virtual Apps (formerly XenApp)

    • Although I recommend Xenapp in all serious VDI/remote application situations, it is expensive and will add a lot of money to any projects budget. Some places will have a hard time justifying using it vs. the built in (free) Microsoft product and this makes the cost an area they could improve on.
    • Previous versions of Xenapp were more admin friendly than the current iteration. One example would be the ability to assign values to each server in your farm such that if you had a server that you wanted less users on it was an easy task. Xenapp now divides the users evenly with little way of doing granular load balancing.
    • Another crucial missing feature of Xenapp is the ability to move users from one server to another without making them log back in. For example, if you have a server that you know is having an issue it would be helpful if we could move users off onto a healthy server without making them logoff/kicking them off.
    Anonymous | TrustRadius Reviewer

    Parallels RAS

    • Active directory dependent. Would like to have other options for authentication outside of AD. Can use SSO with Google, etc but still needs to verify the user against AD for permissions.
    • There are a log of group policy options that can be used, some directly Parallels related, others Windows OS/Terminal Services specific. Would be nice to have a collection or guide of best used GPO options for performance, security, etc.
    Anonymous | TrustRadius Reviewer

    Pricing Details

    Citrix Virtual Apps (formerly XenApp)

    General

    Free Trial
    Free/Freemium Version
    Premium Consulting/Integration Services
    Entry-level set up fee?
    No

    Starting Price

    Parallels RAS

    General

    Free Trial
    Yes
    Free/Freemium Version
    Premium Consulting/Integration Services
    Entry-level set up fee?
    No

    Starting Price

    Likelihood to Renew

    Citrix Virtual Apps (formerly XenApp)

    No score
    No answers yet
    No answers on this topic

    Parallels RAS

    Parallels RAS 7.1
    Based on 8 answers
    The product is very useful and fairly easy to maintain. We enjoy the multiple additonal platforms we can now run our Windows only Client Server applications on, such as Macs, iPads, phones, etc. We also find that speed is improved for using this applications over a WAN, while it still FEELS like running the application locally.
    Craig Cormier | TrustRadius Reviewer

    Usability

    Citrix Virtual Apps (formerly XenApp)

    Citrix Virtual Apps (formerly XenApp) 8.0
    Based on 1 answer
    Functions well in a Department of Defense environment, particularly when paired with a physical NetScaler that is FIPS compliant
    Anonymous | TrustRadius Reviewer

    Parallels RAS

    Parallels RAS 7.7
    Based on 2 answers
    Installation is straight forward, with no complications. Same for licensing.
    Anonymous | TrustRadius Reviewer

    Reliability and Availability

    Citrix Virtual Apps (formerly XenApp)

    No score
    No answers yet
    No answers on this topic

    Parallels RAS

    Parallels RAS 8.4
    Based on 2 answers
    If you have the bandwidth to set it up that way, you can definitely have availibility near 100%
    Craig Cormier | TrustRadius Reviewer

    Performance

    Citrix Virtual Apps (formerly XenApp)

    No score
    No answers yet
    No answers on this topic

    Parallels RAS

    Parallels RAS 7.5
    Based on 2 answers
    It does not seem to add much overhead to the applications that it is serving
    Craig Cormier | TrustRadius Reviewer

    Support Rating

    Citrix Virtual Apps (formerly XenApp)

    No score
    No answers yet
    No answers on this topic

    Parallels RAS

    Parallels RAS 8.9
    Based on 145 answers
    We've only had to contact the support team a handful of times but when we have had to contact support we usually receive a response within a few hours. In one incident we found a bug in the HTML5 code and within a month we were given a patch to resolve the issue.
    Anonymous | TrustRadius Reviewer

    Online Training

    Citrix Virtual Apps (formerly XenApp)

    No score
    No answers yet
    No answers on this topic

    Parallels RAS

    Parallels RAS 7.5
    Based on 2 answers
    Documentation is fair but sometimes a little difficult to follow
    Craig Cormier | TrustRadius Reviewer

    Implementation Rating

    Citrix Virtual Apps (formerly XenApp)

    Citrix Virtual Apps (formerly XenApp) 7.0
    Based on 2 answers
    Issues with overlapping settings caused troubleshooting to be a problem during the early stages of deployment.
    Anonymous | TrustRadius Reviewer

    Parallels RAS

    Parallels RAS 7.2
    Based on 4 answers
    Expect word of mouth to result in additional applications being requested very soon after go-live.
    Joe Foran | TrustRadius Reviewer

    Alternatives Considered

    Citrix Virtual Apps (formerly XenApp)

    We tried Microsoft's RemoteApp before settling on Citirx's XenApp. RemoteApp is not scalable for large implementations, management can not be guaranteed, and multiple server management is not available. RemoteApp is best suited for smaller environments that do not require complex publishing. Citrix XenApp provides customers with improved maintenance and manageability, improved end-user experience for application delivery, and increased performance for users.
    Eric Mueller, CSM, PMP | TrustRadius Reviewer

    Parallels RAS

    We still have one small Citrix unit in production. But Parallels Remote Application Server is far simpler to configure and get working out the box with exactly what you need, whether it be publishing entire desktops or publishing standalone applications. One of the nice things was that we could publish an app from anywhere. Even if it is on one PC, we can make it available to all the relevant people. Citrix began to feel a bit clunky in comparison.
    Ben Rutherford | TrustRadius Reviewer

    Scalability

    Citrix Virtual Apps (formerly XenApp)

    No score
    No answers yet
    No answers on this topic

    Parallels RAS

    Parallels RAS 8.2
    Based on 1 answer
    Can handle single instance or multiple instances and redundancies.
    Craig Cormier | TrustRadius Reviewer

    Return on Investment

    Citrix Virtual Apps (formerly XenApp)

    • Adding additional seats to the license usually comes with a lot of up-sell before the sales rep will actually sell you the license you need.
    • The requirement of Microsoft RDS to run Citrix XenApp doubles the cost required to run and adds an additional server. RDS could be used alone to do the same thing Citrix does.
    • The cost of upgrading (and dependencyon on) RDS licenses prevents us from upgrading the citrix environment.
    • Once setup, it is fairly stable and requires very little admin intervention.
    • Our External Auditors quickly approved Citrix as a security tool.
    Anonymous | TrustRadius Reviewer

    Parallels RAS

    • As a replacement for Citrix, the ROI is massive as its simpler but just as good at 90% of things
    • Time saved on the RDP management compared to the standard windows options is great
    • Does require a couple of servers to run and can be done on a DC which is a shame
    Ryan Snelson | TrustRadius Reviewer

    Screenshots

    Add comparison