Citrix DaaS (formerly Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops service) Reviews

We use Remote PC Access and Remote Desktop Access. We use the solution for two of our clients. For each, we virtualized their whole workspace, so if they log in from anywhere, they get access to all the applications. 

We've locked down their data centers, so some of the users, depending on their rights, cannot even copy stuff from the Citrix environment to their local desktops. Some users with more elevated rights are allowed to access their local. 

It's for work from anywhere, but we had it before COVID. We've had it like this for a very long time.

One of the benefits is that our clients can work from anywhere. It's all consolidated in one environment. It makes it easy for them as things easily accessible from any environment.

It provides the flexibility of being used on any device which makes the employee experience better, in terms of ease of use.

We've also set up access according to security group so it's very secure. We can lock down the environment completely.

As an end-to-end solution for implementing Zero Trust principles I would rate it a six or a seven out of 10, because it doesn't cover all aspects of Zero Trust. There are quite a few aspects you need to cover.

We've used it since 2011.

The stability is very good. In some of our environments, we are on old versions so we're busy upgrading. On the old versions, we have to do a lot of session resets. Hopefully, on the newer versions, after we've upgraded, we won't have so many instances where sessions need to be reset.

The scalability is good because, once you've set it up with the correct architecture, you can just add servers. It's very easy. You can't clone it because there's something with the SID that makes it difficult to clone. But with the latest version, you have that ability where you provision a server according to a template. It's very good.

One of the environments we deployed it in has about 180 concurrent users, and the other one has about 85 concurrent users.

If we upgrade or we set up a new environment, it takes us three months. We do have Citrix consultants who help us. We're thinking that we're maybe doing something wrong because it takes so long, but even with their help, it takes long. It's very complex to set up. If we set up an RDS farm, we can do it within three days.

Our clients have seen return on investment with Citrix in the security and through work-from-anywhere.

We use other technologies. For SD-WAN and web filtering we use TIBCO.

We use RDS in environments where people can't afford Citrix, because Citrix is very expensive. But in terms of security, the Citrix environment, and how you can set it up, is a bit more secure.

The centralized policy control and distributed enforcement is an eight out of 10. It's complex to set up.

When it comes to the security of intellectual property when remote employees are using the solution, I would also rate it at eight. You can protect your environment, but I don't know if you've got logs or things like DLP that can assist you to see what's being moved out of the environment.

Citrix plays a part in our clients' business continuation strategies. We will continue to make use of it as is, because it's much easier to manage the environment, the access, and upgrades. We install the applications only on the application servers. It's secure and makes it easy to work from anywhere, and it makes it easy to lock down the environment.

My advice would be to get a Citrix engineer to assist you with your architecture and to send your engineers on training.

Remote workers/branch offices needed quick, reliable access to resources at the Corporate Data Center no matter what kind of device they were working from.

It has allowed us to provide network/application resources to anyone anywhere, no matter what kind of device the end user had, we were usually able to find a compatible Citrix receiver app.  That gave our user base flexibility to be anywhere and still be productive.

I found the ease of deployment, scalability, and security to be to our benefit when supplying virtual applications/resources to our clients.

Printing is huge, there are a lot of shortfalls with supporting printing over XenApp.  I know it isn't all a Citrix issue, Microsoft needs to do some work to get the print subsystem streamlined since it apparently hasn't been looked at since Windows NT4 days.

More than seven years.

Very easy to scale, virtual servers can be stood up quickly on your virtual platform using Citrix PVS

No previous solution

ThinApp

The Provisioning Services and Machine Creation Services features allow you to provision workloads just by following a wizard, and most importantly depending of what you have in your environment, either a below average network (Machine Creation Services) or fast and large storage (Provisioning Services). You are able to use either one of them to improve the time it takes to build workloads and make them available to users.

One of our clients where we implemented XenDesktop has a highly mobile fleet of users, and providing access to shared desktops either via Wyse terminals or tablets has really shown what a difference in improving efficiency and reliability can do to a system. What we love the most about XenDesktop is the simple and easy way to scale on-demand depending on the workload.

Citrix Director, which is like the monitoring interface from Citrix could use a revamp in the way that it displays information. The display is not very intuitive, and it could also have better integration with SCOM via Comtrade MP (now Citrix) and other monitoring tools. This is in progress with v7.8 using SNMP traps which will allow Director to talk to upstream monitoring systems like BMC Patrol, CA Spectrum, Tivoli, etc.

I've been using it for three years.

With the deployment, it was only doing the design that took a while to build. It was a very particular client with a not so good network, so we had to work around that, but Citrix adjusted perfectly, for every issue we found when designing XenDesktop had a feature to make it happen.

XenDesktop is a very mature product and since implementation early last year, we've only had couple of issues that required our attention. As the solution was built with High Availability in mind, we only suffered from a degradation in service rather than a full outage of the system.

If you need more hosted shared desktops, boom it's really easy, and only takes couple of clicks and in minutes the new workloads are available and ready to be used.

Excellent, Citrix support guys are top of the line, and when we required a Citrix Consultant on premises, Citrix sent one straight away to assist us.

Previously, I used VMware Horizon View. This solution is simple and elegant, but it lacks the robustness Citrix has. Protocols and features to improve user experience when the network is not the best, are features that VMware has but they are not as effective as Citrix ones. The ICA protocol from Citrix has been maturing for many years, and the amount of settings you can tweak to deliver a great user experience is incredible. It can be a bit complicated, but if you work with the product you can work out what option suits best your scenario. VMware is still behind but let’s not think it is the underdog as they are gaining market share and it is a cheaper solution than Citrix.

After the design was built, agreed upon, and firewall rules were defined, deployment of the solution was a breeze. Having XenDesktop running on top of XenServer as native hypervisor is the best way to go. When machines are created via MCS or PVS you don’t need to do anything else for the VMs to be created as XenDesktop talks directly to the hypervisor and instructs it to create whatever workloads you need on the fly.

The implementation was done in-house mostly, however with the design considerations we approached Citrix for assistance and to confirm whether or notour design considerations were following best practices. One thing to consider when implementing Citrix and a set of policies is that if it is a big environment, you are deploying, please ensure that the person or team that's doing the design knows what they are doing. Citrix works marvellously when properly configured but if not, you will find a world of trouble trying to make it work as you want.

For implementation, my advice is if you are designing a big environment contact Citrix Professional Services. If you're not sure on some aspects of your design, and have a CCE-V in your team, this is the key person to contact when doing a design for a large environment - 5000+ workloads for desktop or server.

Citrix is a pricey product, but it is the best product for large corporate companies that want to squeeze to the last buck the life of their existing computers. Using Citrix allows medium to large companies to save money when computer hardware refreshes need to happen; Using shared desktops with Windows Server 2012 R2 as OS you can provision this for a large fleet of users that are probably still using a Windows XP computer but the user experience they will have will be like using Windows 8.1 or Windows 10 if you use the latest version of XenDesktop

Plan your budget, and do a PoC first if possible to get key users feedback, work with Citrix licensing team to find out what best license scheme adjust to your needs, don’t go out and buy the Enterprise license because it has it all, check first what your design requires and after that make an informed decision.

The main features that I felt were valuable to our organization were:

• Ability to manage iOS and Android mobile devices.
• Application white/black listing.
• Comprehensive rule based policies with relative parity between platforms.

In this case it was an upgrade from XenMobile 8.6 so it was an upgrade to maintain support from the vendor. The main areas of improvement would be around reporting and integration with ShareFile and access to the Worx suite of mobile applications (WorxMail, WorxWeb, WorxNotes).

Even with professional services, deployment can be a challenge; especially when integrating with Exchange when rolling out WorxMail (as an alternative over the native mail clients to containerize and restrict access content). Support is also an area that we struggled with; inconsistent quality between support analysts.

I have used XenMobile for a little over 2 years.

We did encounter deployment issues. Integration with the NetScaler appliances and ShareFile were two of them but one of the biggest issues was around the wrapping of the Worx apps. As the Worx applications were updated, the wrapping tools would periodically also require updates but the releases were sometimes out of sync. Support also was limited with application wrapping. It would have been nice if Citrix Support would have dedicated more staff training for the Worx apps, the wrapping of them and how they are deployed.

XenMobile v9 was relatively stable once it was up and running. After Citrix professional services left the site, we spent another couple of months tweaking and testing before we were willing to migrate our devices to the new environment.

We did not encounter any scalability issues.

When you are dealing with the pre-sales teams and the professional services teams, they are really good. Our experience was that typically, if they didn’t know the answer to something, they had access to resources that could bring you closer to a resolution.

This is one area that concerned me with Citrix. I know that during our deployment, Citrix was making some changes internally and it’s possible that we just got caught in that change. But over the two years that I had access to Enterprise support, it was touch and go getting access to a quality engineer who knew how to actually resolve an issue rather than read it out of a prepared script. We always tried make our calls early in the day when we knew we would get access to support either in North America or UK/Germany/Ireland; otherwise it was always a game of phone tag when dealing with some of the other global call centres.

We did not use a previous solution. We upgraded from a previous version of XenMobile as we had a significant investment in the Citrix stack already.

Initial setup was complex. We had integration into ShareFile, AppController (for the Mobile Application Management -MAM), NetScalers and then we tried to deploy the mobile apps at the same time, so we could get away from ActiveSync. I felt that the complexity simply increased with the addition of integration points. Even our professional services team had difficulties at times as the products are complex on their own, much less when you are trying to get them to work together. I would recommend phasing the deployments, if your schedule permits. Start with getting XenMobile and the AppController up and running first, wrap and deploy the Worx apps and then worry about ShareFile later in the project. The secondary concern is for the end user, because it’s a lot of change to to cope with if there is a "Big Bang" approach.

We used Citrix’s professional services for the engagement. While they were very easy to deal with and tried to accommodate our design, I think they were still new to their roles.

Sit down and seriously review your mobility strategy. If you don’t have one, draft something before you get started. Consider where you feel your organization is going to be in the next 2 to 5 years. I would consider an mobile device management (MDM) solution to have a lifespan of about 3 years as they have to adapt to a series of vendors (Apple, Google, Samsung, etc.) that move a lot faster than they do.

Determine what features you are planning to roll out to your users over this timeframe (i.e. access to internal documentation [ShareFile], access to Internet sites [WorxWeb], etc.) as Citrix has a variety of options that can affect which licenses you will need and where you can save money. If you have an existing Citrix investment, look at the Enterprise licensing as you get quite a bit extra,(such as ShareFile for free).

We did not evaluate alternatives due to our existing Citrix investment, so we opted to stay with Citrix.

XenMobile is a good, stable product, but make sure you investigate what features you are looking to roll out and decide whether XenMobile isn’t overkill. Depending on what want to deploy, you may need to examine your resource requirements to not just deploy, but support as well. Training isn’t cheap for any Citrix course but XenMobile from an administration perspective, is pretty simple to learn.

You can manage all devices and users in your company. You can respond rapidly to user requests. If you use the thin client, you can save energy.

You can simulate disaster scenarios for our virtual world and you can increase your virtual security.

You can create Linux virtual desktops with XenDesktop, but only Red Hat and SUSE versions. I would like to be able to create Linux virtual desktops for VMs running Ubuntu, Kali and other Linux versions. Citrix should add this features to the next version.

I would like applications to open faster. Citrix can increase applications' startup time.

I have been using XenDesktop for nine years.

I had a stability issue with Citrix XenServer. If you experience a problem with XenServer, you must know Linux commands, unlike with VMWare ESX. You can solve any problem with the GUI on VMWare ESX. With Citrix, it must be developed.

Citrix has a very easy setup GUI in versions 7.x.

Implementation varies from company to company. If you have more than 10,000 users in your company, I prefer to perform implementation in-house.

Regarding Citrix XenApp & XenDesktop licenses:

• Example 1 - You have 100 users in your company. If all workers use Citrix products during work time, you can select the Citrix user/device license. (For any company.)
• Example 2 - If your company uses a shift system (60 workers in the morning, 40 workers at night), you can use a Citrix concurrent license. (For example, any university.)

This Citrix product is flexible, easy to manage and faster than similar products such as VMWare Horizon.

The initial installation plan should be well-done. It must be well-constructed and it must be very well-optimized. Anyone can install this product, but not everyone can manage this product.

My rating refers to version 7.x of the product. I rate earlier versions lower.

The central administration and deployment of desktops and apps. XenDesktop gives a full desktop experience i.e. the user gets a Windows machine with a C drive and loaded with a set of applications such as mail, productivity suites and access to files.

We have 12 offices around the island, and users able to connect to the same desktop and access their apps and files from any of these locations. Road warriors get access to the insurance apps on their mobile devices of any OS.

The studio is very slow.

We've been using it since May 2010, alongside XenApp and XenServer.

From an administrative point of view, it is easy to deploy and maintain.

In the beginning yes, especially if you are running a large number of desktops.

No issues encountered, and we run 600 virtual desktops.

8/10.

10/10.

No, but we did try VMWare View as well as part of a lengthy POC. Citrix XenDesktop & XenApp came out on top.

It was a straightforward wizard-based setup.

We used a mix of a vendor and an in-house one. The vendor was excellent, and they advised on the right architecture for performance and scalability, so I would give them a 10/10.

It's reduced the PC maintenance and upgrade costs by two or three times.

Carefully make the distinction between XenApp and XenDesktop. XenApp uses a mix of Microsoft RDS and Citrix to provision the service so this increases the licensing cost, as well as the amount of administration behind it.

• VMWare View
• Kaviza Desktop (later bought by Citrix)

You should also have a look at Atlantis Computing as well. XenDesktop is deployed along Atlantis ILIO, which is phenomenal.

The infrastructure for both XenApp and XenDesktop must be carefully designed.

Carefully select the components for the architecture. Running virtual desktops or apps require careful planning and sizing. We found SSD disk to be extremely appropriate.

The central administration and deployment of desktops and apps. Also, XenApp restricts access to those applications that you, as the admin, will define. XenApp works best if there are no bandwidth limitations in your area.

We have 12 offices around the island, and users are able to connect to the same desktop and access their apps and files from any of these locations. Road warriors get access to the insurance apps on their mobile devices of any OS.

The studio is very slow.

We've been using it since May 2010, alongside XenDesktop and XenServer.

No issues encountered. From an administrative point of view, it is easy to deploy and maintain.

In the beginning yes, especially if you are running a large number of desktops.

No issues encountered, and we run 600 virtual desktops.

8/10.

10/10.

No, but we did try VMWare View as well as part of a lengthy POC. Citrix XenDesktop & XenApp came out on top.

It was a straightforward installation, a simple wizard-based one on Windows.

We used a mix of a vendor and an in-house one. The vendor was excellent, and they advised on the right architecture for performance and scalability, so I would give them a 10/10.

It's reduced the PC maintenance, and upgrade costs by two or three times.

Carefully make the distinction between XenApp and XenDesktop. XenApp uses a mix of Microsoft RDS and Citrix to provision the service so this increases the licensing cost, as well as the amount of administration behind it.

• VMWare View
• Kaviza Desktop (later bought by Citrix)

Carefully select the components for the architecture. Running virtual desktops or apps require careful planning and sizing. We found SSD disk to be extremely appropriate.

The infrastructure for both XenApp and XenDesktop must be carefully designed.

I use the solution as one of the main applications for my desktop infrastructure.

The solution supports all the essential features I require. Also, I can use it from anywhere.

The solution functions slowly. It takes a long time to load. This particular area could be better.

I have been using the solution for three years.

I rate the solution's stability a five or six out of ten.

The solution achieves all the goals I set it up for. Thus, it is highly scalable. I rate its scalability an eight out of ten.

The solution is average. I rate it a five out of ten.