Citrix DaaS vs. Parallels Remote Application Server (Parallels RAS)

Citrix DaaS

157 Reviews and Ratings

Parallels Remote Application Server (Parallels RAS)

263 Reviews and Ratings

Overview
Product	Rating	Most Used By	Product Summary	Starting Price
Citrix DaaS	Score8.7 out of 10	N/A	Citrix DaaS (formerly Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops, or XenDesktop) is a virtual desktop infrastructure (VDI) and application virtualization solution from Citrix.	$375
Parallels RAS	Score6.8 out of 10	N/A	Parallels Remote Application Server (Parallels RAS, formerly 2X RAS), is application virtualization technology, billed as a solution to extend the life of legacy OS (like Windows XP) with its virtual desktop for any device. Maltese company 2X Software developed the technology, but was acquired by Parallels (in Seattle, WA) in February, 2015 to extend their cross-platform support solutions.	$120 per year per user

Pricing

Citrix DaaS

Parallels RAS

Virtual Apps: $375

No answers on this topic

Pricing Offerings
Citrix DaaS	Parallels RAS
Free Trial
No	Yes
Free/Freemium Version
No	No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No	No

No setup fee

No setup fee

—

—

Community Pulse
Key User Insights
	Citrix DaaS	Parallels RAS
Considered Both Products	Citrix No answer on this topic	Alludo Verified User Chose Parallels RAS Citrix has more bells and whistles within their product line, but we've actually been pleasantly surprised with the performance of Parallels Remote Application Server (Parallels RAS) vs our Citrix implementation. Citrix Netscaler has way more functionality than the Parallels … Incentivized Helpful? Verified User Chose Parallels RAS Better overall Incentivized Helpful? Verified User Chose Parallels RAS Citrix is a great products but very expensive. That's why we choose Parallels Remote Application Server (Parallels RAS). Citrix is a great products but very expensive. That's why we choose Parallels Remote Application Server (Parallels RAS). Citrix is a great products but very … Incentivized Helpful? Verified User Chose Parallels RAS We evaluated Citrix as well as Parallels when we undertook this project, and our research concluded that not only was Parallels much easier to set up and use, but it was much more cost-effective. Incentivized Helpful? Verified User Chose Parallels RAS Cost-effectiveness; Technical and Service Support. Incentivized Helpful? Verified User Chose Parallels RAS The cost of the two products is significantly different. Though Citrix has many advantages and features, the cost was a primary factor that helped us make that choice. Incentivized Helpful? Verified User Chose Parallels RAS Parallels Remote Application Server is a cost-effective solution for Citrix and VMware products. It is also less complex to configure and manage. Offers similar connectivity options and integrates easily with 2FA authentication, for example from Google which is a free option. Incentivized Helpful? Verified User Chose Parallels RAS faster, leaner and more comfortable at the same time cheaper than Citrix, and in relation to the benefits to native RDS good price/performance ratio Incentivized Helpful? Verified User Chose Parallels RAS For the time we've used Parallels, we've found Parallels much easier to set up and manage over Citrix. Incentivized Helpful? Verified User Chose Parallels RAS The least prerequisites for RAS server compare to other solutions. Server configuration is totally based on user load. Licensing model is impressive. The most important factor for us was the support. Parallels Remote Application Server support is more than expected and all … Incentivized Helpful? Anji Reddy Sr. IT Manager in Information Technology at Mondee Inc (Hospitality, 201-500 employees) Chose Parallels RAS Primary objective is save cost. Easy to configure policy and has more security Incentivized Helpful? Ryan Snelson Director Of Technical Services in Information Technology at IDT Support Solutions Ltd (Computer & Network Security, 1-10 employees) Chose Parallels RAS I think it's a pretty easy comparison of the two. Citrix is more expensive and more complicated compared to Parallels Remote Application Server; however, Parallels Remote Application Server misses the nice audio plugins that Citrix has for teams, etc. Parallels Remote … Incentivized Helpful? Verified User Chose Parallels RAS Parallel RAS is so much easier to install than Citrix. Doesn't require a NetScaler for external access. The customizing for the login page is so much simpler they anything we have used. The single console helps our helpdesk staff manage clients much easier. Incentivized Helpful? Tom Robertson Owner in Information Technology at Innermark Consulting (Hospital & Health Care, 1-10 employees) Chose Parallels RAS Parallels is far superior to basic RDS and is comparable to Citrix at less cost and hassle. Incentivized Helpful? Joe Foran Information Technology Director in Information Technology at Continuum of Care (Non-profit Organization Management, 501-1000 employees) Chose Parallels RAS Parallels Remote Application Server competes against Citrix on a one-for-one feature setlist. It provides many of the same services and capabilities. It is, overall, a simpler product to use and configure. It does not compete perfectly in the VDI space, as the Citrix offering … Incentivized Helpful? Udo Janssen Director in Corporate at GCT mbH (Computer Networking, 11-50 employees) Chose Parallels RAS Setting up and managing Parallels RAS is extremely quick and easy. Support in the form of manufacturer support is better. In general, support for resellers is better at Parallels and easier for resellers. Incentivized Helpful? Stefan Zuban IT Resources Manager in Information Technology at European Commission (Government Administration, 10,001+ employees) Chose Parallels RAS Citrix Virtual Apps has too many constraints to integrate into our corporate network. Incentivized Helpful? Verified User Chose Parallels RAS We use Citrix and RAS both, and RAS is a cheaper, simplified solution compare to Citrix. Incentivized Helpful? Jean Huveneers CTO in Information Technology at Xillion ICT Solutions BV (Computer Networking, 11-50 employees) Chose Parallels RAS Parallels Remote Application Server is easier for implementation and maintenance. Cheaper than Citrix. Incentivized Helpful? Verified User Chose Parallels RAS Parallels RAS combines almost all features in one product. Incentivized Helpful? Martin Tuxen Grandeville Support/Tech Manager in Research & Development at Inventory2 ApS (Information Technology & Services, 1-10 employees) Chose Parallels RAS 10 years ago we selected what was called 2X at that time, and is now Parallels, because it was much cheaper and easier to handle than Citrix Desktop. We have used it every day since although I believe the pricing nowadays is about the same. But we can't see any reason to change … Incentivized Helpful? Raj Mehta President in Information Technology at DSS Toronto (Information Technology & Services, 51-200 employees) Chose Parallels RAS Set-up is many times faster especially for remote/external access. It takes hours with Parallels instead of the days it takes with other alternatives. Incentivized Helpful? Jeffrey Sabotin Director of IT in Information Technology at RealTime Services (Financial Services, 11-50 employees) Chose Parallels RAS Citrix Virtual Apps is quite complicated and requires about 8-10 servers, almost all redundant and duplicated. It seems to also require someone that is certified to be on your staff in order just to understand the setup, install, monitoring, and use. Citrix does have great … Incentivized Helpful?
	Would buy again
	No answers on this topic	No answers on this topic
	Delivers good value for the price
	No answers on this topic	No answers on this topic
	Happy with the feature set
	No answers on this topic	No answers on this topic
	Lived up to sales and marketing promises
	No answers on this topic	No answers on this topic
	Implementation went as expected
No answers on this topic	No answers on this topic

User Ratings
	Citrix DaaS	Parallels RAS
Likelihood to Recommend	8.0 (55 ratings)	8.9 (151 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew	8.2 (4 ratings)	8.8 (21 ratings)
Usability	9.0 (7 ratings)	8.0 (28 ratings)
Availability	8.4 (2 ratings)	9.1 (4 ratings)
Performance	7.4 (4 ratings)	4.5 (4 ratings)
Support Rating	7.9 (8 ratings)	8.6 (129 ratings)
In-Person Training	10.0 (1 ratings)	- (0 ratings)
Online Training	8.3 (2 ratings)	7.3 (2 ratings)
Implementation Rating	9.0 (4 ratings)	8.2 (10 ratings)
Configurability	8.4 (2 ratings)	7.3 (4 ratings)
Ease of integration	2.4 (4 ratings)	4.5 (3 ratings)
Product Scalability	9.2 (2 ratings)	7.3 (3 ratings)
Vendor post-sale	5.2 (2 ratings)	9.1 (4 ratings)
Vendor pre-sale	7.0 (2 ratings)	9.1 (4 ratings)