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

We use the product to give application access to external providers. It helps us publish remote desktops and applications.

Citrix DaaS’s most valuable feature is the virtualization of applications and desktops.

The product’s customization feature needs improvement.

We have been using Citrix DaaS for two years.

I rate the product’s stability an eight out of ten.

We have 400 Citrix DaaS users in our organization. We might increase its usage. I rate its scalability an eight out of ten.

The technical support services are good.

Positive

I rate the initial setup process a five out of ten. It is simple. However, you need to have some knowledge of how it works. It is a quality learning experience. It takes a few hours to complete for an advanced user. At the same time, it takes a day or two to study the process.

We recently received the product’s renewal quote, three times the last price. It is an expensive solution. I rate its pricing a nine out of ten.

I advise others to get training on how to use Citrix DaaS. It will help them understand the functionality before purchasing it. I rate it an eight out of ten.

We use Citrix for VDI and publishing applications. My company only has 50 users, but some of my customers have more than 10,000 users.

Remote access is useful.  

Citrix is a highly mature product, but they could always add more benefits by acquiring a third-party software product to integrate with their their solution and make it more complete.

I think they can improve the troubleshooting to make it easier for users to solve problems on their own. For example, it could provide an error code and some instructions on how to reconnect to the database or do something proactive to fix the issue with the system.

I have been using Citrix for more than 20 years.

Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops is a backbone platform that organizations rely on. If Citrix is down, then the organization can't function, so it must be a stable solution. If we are working in a thousand-user organization and Citrix goes down, then 1000 employees are left idle.

If you can afford the licenses, you can scale Citrix up as much as you want. 

The initial setup is easy and only takes two or three hours. The most complex task is coordinating between the golden image and organizational resources. You need to install all the organization's applications and adjust the settings to meet the company's needs. Setting up a Citrix farm takes less than five hours, but tailoring it to the organization requires another three or four days.

The Citrix license model has changed. It costs around $240 per user for a single username, but a concurrent license costs double.

I rate Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops nine out of 10. This is the leading solution in the world for remote work. Citrix has had the top remote display for the last 20 years, and there is a huge technological gap between Citrix and its competitors. However, Citrix doesn't have the same level of marketing as its competitors. Many times, people don't realize that Citrix is the best until they've deployed it.

I recommend taking advantage of Citrix eLearning online courses. Four or five days of online training can help you overcome a lot of shortcomings, but you need two or three years of experience working with the Citrix system and infrastructure to be a system admin. 

In the beginning, the Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops was designed for our COVID-19 business continuity plan. We use a lot of Citrix Desktops (for around 600 people). The desktop was built for out of office work, whitelisting clients, for all work done with a personal computer, and for the business continuity in a white room with dedicated computers. Today, we have changed the total design using enterprise laptops for everybody, so the desktop is gone and we only publish applications for end users.

The profile between the Citrix published applications and the broker profile on the laptop is permitted to use the same profile and the same settings for the user in Citrix and the laptop. It is a mix of both environments.

We are deployed in two parts: Belgium and Luxembourg. In Belgium, we have around 20 sessions concurrently, which are 100 percent deployed on-premise. In Luxemburg, we have around 400 sessions concurrently.

Today, we use only Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops. In the past, we also used Citrix Gateway to bring Citrix on a government forum or working with a personal computer, though this part is totally void today.

While we use it on-premise, we are using it more and more for cloud applications and infrastructure. Workers run applications on-prem to segregate correctly the access rights. All our tasks are on-premise, which is a positive for our security and the regulatory authority.

There was a scenario where a user built very small films for internal communication on his laptop via the VPN using the NAS file system. It's not the best solution. This takes around 45 minutes. With this use case, we installed all the tools on Citrix. Now, the user can build his film in a maximum of two minutes. It was an incredible improvement for the user. Today, this is the best case of Citrix usage for end user experience, using the full capabilities of the server in the data center.

Our organization supports Zero Trust as a security strategy. However, the Zero Trust strategy in the bank is done via the VPN. Also, all laptops connected out of the bank are via VPN. We don't use the full Citrix landscape to do this today.

For all applications in the bank, we set up Active Directory groups to have access rights. All users can access a lot of applications, but the rights are given one by one for each application. Therefore, it's very centralized at the Active Directory level.

The business continuity plan was 100 percent based on Citrix and the client. Today, it is a little different because everybody has a laptop, but the main applications are still available on Citrix. This offers the more flexible possibilities of managing business continuity plans and performance everywhere for end users.

In Luxembourg, a user can use business applications with Citrix inside the building. Then, outside the building, that user cannot use the business applications because we cut the usage of Citrix.

We can provide tons of applications with different settings, behaviors, and operating systems. It is the same way for the user. Then, we are totally transparent for the user to use a lot of totally different applications, which is the most important part of Citrix today.

Remotely, the user can use his personal computer with a VPN to the bank, as there is not always WiFi. We have seen very low boundaries in some cases. With the Citrix application, we provide very beautiful applications. We are running without a lot of resources in the data center and the user doesn't see it. It's totally transparent for them.

In the bank, a major part of all our applications is Microsoft App-V. If App-V is at end of life, then we need a new technology to replace it. As of today, I haven't seen in Citrix Studio that there is a new technology embedded directly in it to replace App-V.

We have been using Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops for more than 10 years. We started with a full complement of Citrix features, but today we only use a small portion of it. This changed over the years. 

The stability of the solution is great. It is not evident to me whether the lack of stability is linked with the new data center, due to a Citrix issue or new component in the new data center. However, in the past, Citrix was very stable. 

In the beginning, we had more than 70 users with only one reboot per week. I have heard that some companies rebooted every day at night. For us, that was not mandatory. The solution has been very stable with the condition that our applications are packaged correctly.

We plan to migrate to the latest LTSR version next year.

The scalability of Citrix is incredible because we use the Provisioning Services (PVS) solution. With this technology, the same image can be streamed to all servers. With this technology, I don't need to install, reinstall, nor repackage it. 

Globally, we have 600 to 700 users with Citrix access in the company. Their roles of Citrix users are private banker, operations, and sales. 

There is not so much support because the solution is very stable. However, we use Citrix ShareFile, and for this, all calls are solved within five hours. Citrix is very good for our usage today, and we haven't had a big issue.

We have been using Citrix for a long time. Building and first implementing Citrix was a little complex. We have a lot of components. However, when you manage all of them correctly, then it's easy. 

The first time, it was a little complicated to build the first images. Today, with versions, this is easy. We built a new image in four hours, which is incredible. Over time, we have improved the function and management of Citrix.

Implementation in the bank was in three steps: 

1. We implemented it in a test environment, like a beta environment, with a beta tester and system engineer to improve the solution and application, then checked everything was working. 
2. In the acceptance environment, we set up all the same settings as production. We asked key users to validate everything: applications and behaviors. 
3. We copied-pasted this environment (if everything was okay) into production for end users and key users. It had totally the same environment with the same behavior. Then, we validated all the environments from acceptance to production directly on the same Citrix environment. 

Acceptance and production are only one big environment where acceptance and production workers cohabit in separate tools and where all users can go into the acceptance or production environments by default. When we validate a new disk or function in a new application, we go to acceptance with just an Active Directory group to validate the solution. This is really great.

In the beginning, we used a partner as an integrator to help us design the Citrix and implement the first part. We have been using a partner for maintenance and upgrades because we don't have the knowledge at this moment about the newest version of Citrix. 

As partners, we used Acidos to build our first version, then we used SecureLink. However, I don't think the Citrix partner aspect of SecureLink's company exists anymore.

We deployed the first bit with our partner. We did this with seven or eight system engineers to build and go through tests. That was the first version. Today, for Belgium and Luxembourg, we have only three system engineers to maintain and publish new applications.

With Citrix, we saved a lot in the past for the business continuity plan. Today, it is not so much, but we still make money because the performance is there.

If you look at cost, then you must look at the number of users that you are covering. If you are only using it for some users, then it is very expensive. However, if you have a massive amount of users, then it begins to be interesting to use Citrix. Because once you are managing thousands of servers with one guy, your maintenance costs decrease per user.

Another major cost is Microsoft because Microsoft Windows costs them. We also need a license for SQL server, Windows Server, and Citrix Remote PC. These are extra costs for the solution that are not covered by the license.

We haven't evaluated similar solutions. We don't have any other solutions for replacing the Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktop. Therefore, I think we will stay with Citrix for a long time.

We use other tools for analysis, not the Citrix tools and analytics. We don't use the Citrix tools because all our firewalls are not Citrix Firewalls.

All our detection and monitoring are not done via the Citrix environment because we have other tools for that.

There has been a lot of improvement in the application. We use the application for so many different things and areas of security. It is incredible what we can do with Citrix. It provides total transparency for us.

Today, it does not provide the flexibility of being used on any device because we use it on enterprise laptops. However, in the past, users could use their personal computer. It covered a lot of models and brands, and it was totally transparent for us. We only asked, "Please install Citrix receivers," then the rest is transparent for the system engineer. 

It is not clear for this moment if we will increase the usage of Citrix, because we don't know where the user will be working going forward (at the office, home, or another country).

I would rate it an eight out of 10. It's not only Virtual Apps and Desktops. Also, other products that I see from Citrix on the market are good. They look for the best performance solution for the end user.

I use Citrix DaaS to connect to devices.

Citrix DaaS is pretty slow. In Citrix DaaS, I have to connect to the computer in another form and always have to keep waiting. Sometimes, I click on Microsoft Teams or Outlook, but it doesn't work at all. We use a few PDM (product data management) software in another company, and they're pretty slow through these things. So we always have to keep waiting, and a lot of time goes wasted.

The speed and connectivity of Citrix DaaS could be improved. Most of the time, it doesn't work for any colleagues. At least one or two employees complain about the solution's speed every day.

I have been using Citrix DaaS for a month.

Citrix DaaS is not a stable solution. I rate Citrix DaaS two out of ten for stability.

I rate Citrix DaaS ten out of ten for scalability because it is scalable and it's been used in a huge form. Around 1,000 users are currently working with the solution in our organization.

The initial setup of Citrix DaaS is very easy. I rate Citrix DaaS ten out of ten for its ease of initial setup.

Getting access to Citrix DaaS took a while, but installing the solution took five to ten minutes. Just one person is enough for the solution's deployment.

I won't recommend Citrix DaaS to other users. I don't know if there are any other better solutions. However, Citrix DaaS is also a good solution if the speed issue is resolved.

Overall, I rate Citrix DaaS a four or five out of ten.

I use the solution to give my workers access to several application in the form of Citrix internal applications for the company.

We had an old software that our servers did not support. So we moved to Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops for cyber engineering in India and Mexico.

The support offered by Citrix's partner needs to improve. The partner support platform should aim to provide more technical information to users.

The solution is very expensive, including the license, and the support, of all the platforms.

For example, the solution of Microsoft, if you are partnered with Microsoft, you have access to the license, and you only need the variable servers from the virtualization with Microsoft.

I have been using the solution for six years.

It is a stable solution. We don't usually have problems with the platform, but escalating the issue is difficult.

It is a very scalable solution. In the last semester, we updated the video graphics on the virtualization and video 3D graphics for the simulation on the hardware, and it was implemented in three days. It took six to seven months to get the GUI and firewall, but that was because of the problem in the country rather than Citrix. Four thousand users are using the solution presently.

The technical support with Citrix is a nine but support with a partner is a four. So the problem with support is not with Citrix. It is more with the partner who was supposed to provide the solution.

Positive

Talking of my own experience, I have tried VMware and Microsoft Hyper- V solutions. But here in the company, Citrix is the only solution.

We recommended a partnership the first time we bought it from Citrix and Citrix. The partnership was closed several years ago, and the new partner could be better. It's not good. Now, Citrix has been bought by another company.

It's costly in the market. But it is not expensive for the company. For the company, it's relatively inexpensive because the core of the work is compensated with the price. Secondly, the price is included in the cost of the business.

Presently, we are in the process of evaluating other competitive solutions and collecting their names. I must propose an error to show why we must change or stay with Citrix.

People planning to use Citrix must take the right decision for their firm rather than evaluate the cost from the start. 

It is a robust solution. I rate it a nine out of ten.

I primarily was in charge of implementation and support. The solution itself was primarily used for remote access.

The solution was perfect for expanding the environment to host more remote access users during the pandemic.

The ability to allow users to have remote access is the product's most valuable aspect.

The initial setup was pretty straightforward. 

The solution scales well.

For the most part, overall stability is what you would expect.

The user profiles could use some improvement. They could use more stability and more functionality as well as user profile redirection.

I've used the solution since 2002 across several organizations. I have a lot of experience with the product as I've used it for quite a while at this point. I've used the solution within the last 12 months, however, for the contract I have now, I am not using it.

The user profiles could be more stable. 

The stability in general is pretty good. It is one of the numerous virtualization applications that have the same reliability as all the others; there's nothing different.

The scalability of the product is quite good and you can expand it if you need to.

It can expand into a larger organization and into an enterprise infrastructure from on-premise to a cloud environment.

I've been in touch with Citrix technical support and I would describe them as sufficient. They are okay in terms of the level of service they provide. 

It's my understanding that the company on my last project did not use a different solution before Citrix.

The initial setup was not overly complex or difficult. It was very simple and quite straightforward. Overall, it's a solution that is easy to implement and maintain. 

The initial deployment only took a few hours and maintenance is pretty minimal in terms of the time required. 

My strategy was to implement it to the required specifications. 

We had four people who handled the last implementation I did. 

Maintenance requires tasks such as image updates, patching, and support.

We help deploy the solution to our clients. We are able to handle any implementations. We don't work directly with Citrix, however, we do work with another third-party company. The experience we had with the company, overall, was positive. 

While I was on the project, I did not see an ROI.

We had a yearly license and we did named instances which I didn't like, due to the fact that they took away the concurrent. I tend to prefer concurrent as you don't get duplications.

The purchase price was around $300,000 USD and then the maintenance fees were 20%. There are no other additional fees.

I don't have any knowledge of the company evaluating anything before choosing Citrix. 

Our organization does not have a business relationship with Citrix. 

I cannot recall the exact version number I last used. It might have been 2106, however, I'm not sure. It was likely the latest version of the product.

I would advise those considering the solution to buy a maintenance contract alongside the solution. 

What I've learned, not so much from Citrix, but all of the virtualization applications is no matter how well your system runs, somebody will ditch. You need to be prepared for that.

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten.

We encountered some challenges in publishing outdated applications to end users, and we initially attributed it to ZenApp. However, we were eventually able to publish these applications to a specific user group that required access. It was a straightforward situation as we were primarily hosting end-of-life applications.

The architecture I built had a robust failover mechanism for the endpoints, and the interface was user-friendly. 

We were able to successfully publish the applications we needed without much difficulty. While understanding the background processes required some reading, I was able to deploy the system without any outside assistance or consulting.

My only issue with Citrix is that they frequently rebrand their products. I'm using the app and everything is fine but after a couple of years, it's entirely different. There were an enormous number of Citrix tools readily available. My immediate concern was selecting the correct ones.

I was able to choose the tools I required, and as previously said, the products I used have now been rebranded as Citrix Workspace.

It's similar to what VMware does with its Workspace One.

Before they transitioned to a workplace, I had assembled a Citrix environment using ZenApp and desktop and expanded upon it. Although it never reached production, I received training and successfully set it up.

In my opinion, it was very robust. I enjoyed working with it. We had used it for several years, and you could see that the software itself was being updated with time. Overall, I found it to be a pleasant experience.

We didn't face any scalability issues as we had a limited number of users, around 20 to 30, who needed access to the end-of-life applications.

The scalability was a nonissue. However, we didn't get into hundreds or thousands of users. I definitely don't have the experience to tell you that.

I didn't have to contact them as I could deploy it myself. I accessed their documentation through their website and my previous experience, which enabled me to do it independently without any assistance from them.

I remember that we had some challenges with sharing printers, especially with setting up access only for the finance and legal departments. It was a bit tricky, and I think that situation would have required assistance from technical support. However, we eventually managed to figure it out and get it to work, which was important for those departments.

If I recall correctly, setting up access to a printer was quite challenging. I don't have the specifics in front of me, and it's been some time since I worked on it, so I can't provide details. However, I do remember that it was more difficult than any other task I had to do.

I found it a bit complex, especially since we started using VMware products more frequently. If I had the choice, I would have simplified the process by using VMware Workspace going forward.

I don't quite remember the specifics of what we had. I believe we had a 25-user license, and I don't recall it being overly expensive. 

It was a reasonable cost. However, if you were to scale it up to hundreds of users, the cost would undoubtedly appear significant.

This is no different from what I would expect from VMware Workspace pricing.

I would rate it around seven or eight. It was highly robust and matured in terms of its features. I was building a high-availability environment while deploying it, and I appreciated its capabilities in that regard. Overall, it was quite robust and dependable.

I was quite satisfied with that as a solution.

Because I wasn't able to take the solution further, I would rate Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops a seven out of ten.

Unfortunately, I wasn't able to thoroughly test it.

Despite not being able to conduct extensive testing, I found it to be good to work with, and it performed as advertised.

If you have a desktop, laptop, or device that can be distributed to end users, to any kind of inconsistency in the institution, we deploy the solution so that anybody can get whatever resource is required. It helps ensure access. It makes it easy for us to give storage, memory, RAM, or processor resources without anything affecting their day-to-day activity. It makes it simple and easy for our institution to provide the kind of activity to the users.

The product is ideal for sharing an application for different resources. For instance, let's say we have a Microsoft Office product and want to share the Microsoft Office product with everyone simultaneously. That can easily be done. 

With this product, everyone can have a similar kind of desktop environment. So it's a virtual environment, the desktop environment. They can do whatever they need in that environment, and different kinds of users can access different kinds of applications. 

The product is scalable. 

If there are connectivity issues, there are stability issues. 

I've been using the solution for one year.

The solution is stable and reliable. However, it depends on the network infrastructure. If we have a stable network infrastructure, then it's stable. That said, if the infrastructure is not stable, I don't recommend this product. If there is an interruption, it might not actually be available to the user, which could cause issues.

The solution is scalable. 

Right now, we have 1,100 virtual workspaces, and we are planning to add 1,500 more. 

We do not use a different type of service right now. 

In terms of handling the setup process, we need planning since it is a bit complex. We need to know the infrastructure itself. The hardware resources can also be a bit expensive, and the licensing might also depend on the number of users that the organization has. Therefore, it is a bit expensive, the initial deployment. The cost of RAM after the deployment is much less.

It needs a proper professional to deploy everything. It also requires the engagement of Citrix. Three to six months is enough to deploy it as the hardware might first actually need to be available. Still, once you have that resource, deploying Citrix also might take additional time.

While internally, it can be managed by an in-house staff, the deployment cannot. It requires proper capacity building to do even the deployment. It is a little bit challenging, so I recommend the setup be done by the consultant. 

The initial setup requires a specific supplier or consultant to handle everything. It can't be done in-house.

In January 2020 they changed the licensing scheme and they're also changing the on-prem licensing scheme to be subscription-based as well. It can be tricky. I don't know why they did that. Maybe it's the marketing strategy. I don't know. The subscription is for three years or five years. If you procure three years subscription, you can use the license, after three years, they'll block it, which can be a challenge if you aren't paying attention to when licensing renewals are due. 

We last updated about a year ago. We are on the 2021 version.

I recommend the solution, however, it depends on the organization's use case. Let's say if that organization needs to share the resource equally through the users or staff they have, then I recommend it. 

I'd rate it nine out of ten.