Overall Satisfaction with Parallels Remote Application Server
We currently have all of our remote work running via Parallels Remote Application Server with multiple servers across our group internationally. This provides a great and easily manageable infrastructure with a versatile and reliable architecture that allows you to manage both users and devices connected to your network. It supports various forms of two-factor authentication. In our case, we use the Google authenticator as it also ties in with other services we use. It also allows us to set up redundant servers and have the ability to load balance on a per session basis. So that if we need to shut one of the production servers down for maintenance, it is easy to do so as it will push the sessions towards the other server.
- Useability
- Configuration
- Administration
- End-user setup
- Support
- Updating your server farm can be difficult
- Unable to push pre-defined config files
- It has provided a more efficient work space for end users
- The downtime costs are low as can be set with high availability in mind
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.
Do you think Parallels Remote Application Server delivers good value for the price?
Yes
Are you happy with Parallels Remote Application Server's feature set?
Yes
Did Parallels Remote Application Server live up to sales and marketing promises?
Yes
Did implementation of Parallels Remote Application Server go as expected?
Yes
Would you buy Parallels Remote Application Server again?
Yes