No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Microsoft App-V vs Parallels Remote Application Server (RAS) comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 4, 2025

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Microsoft App-V
Ranking in Application Virtualization
2nd
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
9
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Parallels Remote Applicatio...
Ranking in Application Virtualization
4th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
25
Ranking in other categories
Virtual Desktop Infrastructure (VDI) (13th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the Application Virtualization category, the mindshare of Microsoft App-V is 14.3%, down from 23.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Parallels Remote Application Server (RAS) is 15.1%, down from 16.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Virtualization Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Microsoft App-V14.3%
Parallels Remote Application Server (RAS)15.1%
Other70.6%
Application Virtualization
 

Featured Reviews

SN
Technical Lead on Virtual Desktop at Orange
Legacy software is maintained effectively, offering cost savings and integration flexibility
I believe there is no room for improvement in Microsoft App-V since it is officially at the end of life. Microsoft does not negotiate extensions for their end-of-life solutions. It has been a great tool over the years, but the company has managed to write most applications to bring them up to date, many written from scratch or as web-based applications. It's highly likely that we will decommission the Microsoft App-V solutions next year, keeping backups for a period until the new applications stabilize. I'm confident that once they transition to newer versions, they will phase out Microsoft App-V just like they do with operating systems. When Microsoft decides to close a version, such as Windows 10-22H2 or 21-H2, it happens. Paying for extended support is costly and, in the end, not worth it. Organizations must think of alternatives, possibly leaning towards MSIX, although MSIX doesn't support very old software used on Windows XP or 2000, which raises doubts about what can truly be improved. It's clear they won't introduce anything new; they will only provide security patches as they approach the end-of-life timeline.
JohanSkibdahl - PeerSpot reviewer
CEO at Etcetera Networks
Secure access across devices with cost-effective seamless integration
One valuable feature is the ability to securely use a wide range of devices to access the company's infrastructure. The inclusion of all necessary components, such as load balancer and gateways, in a monthly fee is also beneficial. In terms of Parallels Desktop, the coherence mode that allows Mac and Windows applications to run seamlessly side by side is highly regarded.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"From my point of view, it reached a maturity where we can consider it to be perfect."
"It is very easy to use from an administration point of view."
"From my experience with Microsoft App-V, the feature I liked the most is the streaming."
"The most interesting and powerful feature for us is the fact that we can upgrade any kind of app instantly."
"The most valuable feature of Microsoft App-V that I found is the possibility to bring old software back to life and publish it for users to do their jobs using those applications."
"We can deploy applications incredibly fast."
"I appreciate the process of being able to change or review my answers."
"Microsoft App-V is a simple, very good working product that just works."
"It does everything we need it to do, it's stable; with the caveat that there is no perfect solution."
"Parallels Desktop allows me to run both Mac and Windows operating systems on a single machine, eliminating the need for separate Windows hardware."
"It is robust. We have some 75 users using it and it doesn't lag. It's very speedy."
"Parallels allows us to provide easy access to applications on multiple devices from any location."
"It is robust."
"Ease of use in publishing apps and installing the agent; the interface is fairly intuitive after some tinkering, and 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."
"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."
"Maintenance of software versions has been greatly simplified, ensuring that all users are using the same version of applications."
 

Cons

"If it were possible to integrate App-V with a cybersecurity solution then we could implement a documentation registry, which would be useful."
"Microsoft App-V has been slow, and users experience delays when launching applications, which presents significant challenges."
"Microsoft App-V is more suited for legacy software usage, and trying to make it work in that context usually feels tricky and unreliable."
"The downside is that Microsoft bought this product and they are going to discontinue it in 2026."
"The process was streamlined but didn't make our work simple. We encountered an issue with the person responsible for designing the website."
"There is definitely room for improvement with Microsoft App-V, especially in terms of enhancing troubleshooting resources and user guidance."
"If it were possible to integrate App-V with a cybersecurity solution then we could implement a documentation registry, which would be useful."
"The reporting features could be improved."
"A potential improvement could be reducing the dependency on Microsoft solutions for Parallels RAS."
"We would like to be able to re-label the OTP (One Time Password) popup so our users can easily recognize that they are to put in their DUO code on that line. Most users see OTP and ask what that is."
"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."
"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."
"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 have had significant, ongoing issues with printing. It would be great to have a best practice for dealing with printing that we can offer to our customers."
"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."
"The main thing that I would improve is their presence here in Mexico. They don't have strong local support here in Mexico."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Clients do not pay licensing fees."
"The pricing of this product is competitive."
"Work with the vendor, as this is a fairly new product and they want use cases. Deals can be made."
"The pricing has always been competitive, and the new SPLA licensing model works great for our business and clients."
"The product is not expensive. I rate its pricing a three or four out of ten."
"We currently use Parallels side-by-side with an Azure cloud-hosted solution. This may be from a lack of product knowledge on my part, but we still need to work out the most effective way to shut down servers outside of hours, thereby reduce hosting costs. I am not entirely convinced Parallels does this well yet."
"It is very affordable."
"It justifies the price. In terms of licensing, initially when we got the product it was an unlimited licensing strategy. We knew would grow in the coming years. So initially, we took a plan which had no limit. After a year or so the strategy changed and we were being limited to 105 licenses, that was the minimum... If there was flexibility for increasing the number of licenses that would be great because you never know how much you are going to grow in the next year."
"Pricing is a little steep."
"Comparable performance to Citrix for our use case at a significantly lower cost. 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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Virtualization solutions are best for your needs.
893,915 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
18%
Healthcare Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Government
8%
University
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Large Enterprise5
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business15
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise10
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Microsoft App-V?
Regarding pricing, I believe flexibility would help retain customers. Costs could be more adaptable to meet varying budgets.
What needs improvement with Microsoft App-V?
There is definitely room for improvement with Microsoft App-V, especially in terms of enhancing troubleshooting resources and user guidance.
What is your primary use case for Microsoft App-V?
I have been using Microsoft App-V for quite some time, and I can describe my use cases, which include various applications that enhance productivity.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Parallels Remote Application Server (RAS)?
The pricing for Parallels RAS is straightforward with a monthly fee for a minimum of 15 licenses. For Parallels Desktop, it is a yearly cost of a couple of hundred euros. No additional fees for mai...
What needs improvement with Parallels Remote Application Server (RAS)?
A potential improvement could be reducing the dependency on Microsoft solutions for Parallels RAS. As for Parallels Desktop, there is nothing specific that needs improvement.
What is your primary use case for Parallels Remote Application Server (RAS)?
The primary use case of Parallels is to offer it to customers as a hosted service. I help them to migrate from other solutions like VMware to Parallels RAS. I recommend it to companies that prefer ...
 

Also Known As

App-V, MS App-V
Parallels RAS
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

The University of Texas at San Antonio (UTSA), GDDKiA, P&V, Etisalat Lanka, Hellenic Petroleum
Arsari Group _ PT Netmarks Indonesia, Izhevsk Elektromekhanicheskiy Zavod (IEMZ) _ Kupol, Abilene Diagnostic Clinic, Fylde Borough Council, YARSTROYREZE LLC, VSK Insurance House, Melenkovsky District of Vladimirskaya Oblast, Sofrigam SA, Antenna International, KingsGate Community Church, Norwegian American Hospital, Island Hotels Group, Medway Council, Medway Council, Voices of September 11th, MacDonald Training Center, Kansas Childrenês Service League, Scope,Next Generation Clubs, WTC Communications, Opera Australia, HSE Integrated, Danier, Bridgwater College, Kern County Mental Health, Tony Tiendas, Spears Manufacturing, Managed Insurance Services Inc., Intuitive Medical Software, M.J. Soffe, Mazda Motors, Israel Military Industries (IMI), Telfair, Upic Solutions, Teleflora, Fisher & Company
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft App-V vs. Parallels Remote Application Server (RAS) and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.
893,915 professionals have used our research since 2012.