just work anywhere
Overall Satisfaction with Parallels Remote Application Server
Like many other organizations we often work at various locations. Additionally we moved our server infrastructure to a housing service provider. VPN connectivity was not an option for us and to avoid several security issues we decided to only allow terminal services when working on our financial or document management systems.
- easy to implement
- seamless operation on local systems
- fast screen output
- security
- multi os
- better HTML5 only implementation
- browser based management
- no problems with VPN connections
- improved security
We love the easy integration and functionality on the client side. With Citrix Workspace we always had connectivity issues and re-logins, which we never had with Parallels RAS. Awingu was also a good choice, because of its browser-only approach, but sometimes it is too unflexible. A combination of both products would be very nice.
In my opinion RAS has a poor HTML5 implementation. But the vailability of client for every plattform is great for us, because we use different devices as we are on the road, e.g. tablets, MacBooks or even smartphones.
In our organization we use VMware ESXi as main infrastructure. But we also implemented RAS in Hyper-V based organizations. The freedom of choice on which infrastructure RAS can be implemented makes it an opportunity for many potential customers.
Do you think Parallels Remote Application Server (Parallels RAS) delivers good value for the price?
Yes
Are you happy with Parallels Remote Application Server (Parallels RAS)'s feature set?
Yes
Did Parallels Remote Application Server (Parallels RAS) live up to sales and marketing promises?
Yes
Did implementation of Parallels Remote Application Server (Parallels RAS) go as expected?
Yes
Would you buy Parallels Remote Application Server (Parallels RAS) again?
Yes