Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Citrix DaaS (formerly Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops service) vs Microsoft App-V 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

Citrix DaaS (formerly Citri...
Ranking in Application Virtualization
1st
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
125
Ranking in other categories
Remote Access (5th), Virtual Desktop Infrastructure (VDI) (3rd), Desktop as a Service (DaaS) (1st)
Microsoft App-V
Ranking in Application Virtualization
2nd
Average Rating
9.6
Reviews Sentiment
8.4
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2025, in the Application Virtualization category, the mindshare of Citrix DaaS (formerly Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops service) is 26.8%, down from 30.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Microsoft App-V is 22.3%, down from 24.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Virtualization
 

Featured Reviews

DavidWood1 - PeerSpot reviewer
Flexible Deployment, reliable performance, and fast transmission speeds
Provisioning Server is a fantastic option for image management in Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops. It offers excellent performance and reliability. On the other hand, while Machine Creation Services can be scaled easily, they can significantly increase storage consumption. For instance, creating a Windows 10 image in MCS typically requires at least 80 GB of storage, in addition to any separate disks needed. To store changes made by users in Machine Creation Services, the differencing disk must be equal in size to the base disk, leading to significant storage consumption. On the other hand, Provisioning Server uses image versioning, creating a new image version every time it's modified. As a result, virtual machines streamed from the server revert to their original state after a reboot, which is similar to their state during the first boot. Using the provisioning server, I start by configuring a virtual machine with either a 2016 or 2019 server operating system. I install the necessary Citrix client provisioning server target device software, followed by installing the required applications. After that, I capture the entire configuration to a file share. The image is then streamed from the file share to the hypervisor, which can handle multiple machines. In some large-scale deployments, we have used a single image to provision thousands of servers. Once the image is captured and stored on the file share, it is set to read-only mode, and any changes made to it are not accepted until it is put in read-write mode. When a virtual machine is rebooted, it returns to its previous state before the changes were made. This feature can be beneficial in situations like a virus outbreak, where a simple reboot of the virtual machines can remove any malicious code or changes. A provisioning server offers a faster recovery time from a bad change and is generally faster than machine creation services. With the provisioning server, changes are not accepted until the read-write mode is enabled, and if a virus outbreak occurs, rebooting the machines restores them to the previous state. On the other hand, machine creation services' speed is dependent on the storage's speed, and recovery time from a bad change can take longer, especially with a large number of devices. If a bad change is made with machine creation services, the replication process can take a while to revert, whereas, with a provisioning server, all machines can be rebooted quickly. Within thirty minutes, I can restore my system to its previous state using the provisioning server.
DP
Enables organizations to deploy applications incredibly fast and reduces delivery time
We can deploy applications incredibly fast. The implementation time is really fast. I like the way the Sequencer works. The publication and management console are really helpful. We switch from the classic MSI through SCCM deployment to App-V with an in-house publication server. The delivery time has decreased by 40% to 45%.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The installation and maintenance are good.​"
"The solution provides everything in one integrated platform. When it comes to monitoring their solution, it is really easy. We have all the information in one place so we can have the right information at the right moment. We can be proactive when it comes to dealing with performance, maintenance, and security issues."
"Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops is a stable solution."
"I found the ease of deployment, scalability, and security to be to our benefit when supplying virtual applications to our clients."
"In terms of scalability, Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops have a lot of technologies baked in there that allow an organization to scale up or down, as required. Further, leveraging Azure for scalability has added value to our organization. For example, pre-COVID-19, we had very few resources in Azure. We had some Virtual Desktops and no application servers. When COVID-19 came along, we knew people were going to be home. We knew that we had to ramp up very quickly. We fully leveraged MCS to be able to scale. Being able to take a single image and build 400,000 Virtual Desktops, all within minutes, was second to none in terms of any other technology out there that we could have used. The scalability to be able to do that in Azure, where we really don't have to worry about storage and compute power because Microsoft does that for us, was fantastic. It was almost like giving our environments steroids. It has been amazing in terms of that scalability. Now, as people start coming back to the office, we can just as quickly scale down so the compute and resource costs in Azure aren't so great anymore."
"I can access it from anywhere."
"First of all, the manageability of the applications for publishing is valuable. Second, it is about being able to run the applications on all main platforms. Third, its licensing is valuable. You can either switch to the cloud and keep on-prem. You can work with this hybrid scenario."
"Among the most valuable features is the Citrix Workspace, which allows us to drive that thin-client connection and the remote control/remote access capabilities. Those things have allowed us to connect an awful lot of people quickly from home and that's obviously helped during the pandemic."
"We can deploy applications incredibly fast."
"The most interesting and powerful feature for us is the fact that we can upgrade any kind of app instantly."
"It is very easy to use from an administration point of view."
"It is easy to scale. You can quickly deploy additional instances. Rollbacks are easy because there is an automatic backup every hour. Deploying the application is straightforward and efficient."
 

Cons

"When there are technical issues, sometimes we can't get on the cloud."
"There is room for improvement on the hypervisor side, providing better integration between the hypervisor and the product line. I suspect that they haven't put the work into that because of the move to the cloud. They want everything to be cloud-hosted. But for folks like us, who will always be a hybrid model, that's of some concern."
"The product is currently not working well in hosting conferencing software like Zoom, Team, and Salon."
"Pricing and technical support need improvement."
"The product's technical support services need improvement."
"Pricing can be lower and roaming profiles need to be fixed to work consistently."
"I think Citrix's support is good, but sometimes it is a little slow."
"They can simplify the process of printers. Printers were quite a difficult issue. It took us a long time to iron this issue out. We have the most simple use case where people connect from home to either a virtual machine or their physical desktop. We tried more complex solutions like Machine Creation Services, and they were more overhead than they were worth for us. I found them difficult to work with and confusing, and they were not worth the work for us."
"The reporting features could be improved."
"The process was streamlined but didn't make our work simple. We encountered an issue with the person responsible for designing the website."
"If it were possible to integrate App-V with a cybersecurity solution then we could implement a documentation registry, which would be useful."
"The downside is that Microsoft bought this product and they are going to discontinue it in 2026. This is worrisome for us."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The Citrix licensing scheme is really straightforward and simple. It doesn't have hidden costs. You get what you pay for. It is easy to understand what is on the product, so it's simple to get a clear idea of how much it costs. Licensing is not an issue."
"Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops is an expensive solution."
"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."
"We spent nearly 1,50,000 Euros for 250 licenses."
"We are just now approaching the end of our initial purchase, which was an excellent price for us as an academic institution. We got a very good deal to get us on board. That license is up for renewal in about a year, and we are nervously waiting to see what the pricing will be."
"Citrix licensing is expensive."
"In terms of pricing with the Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops, I think it has gotten better over the years. Citrix has found more dynamic ways to be able to revive licensing models that fit many different scenarios that organizations have. We have been able to evolve our own licensing over the years to accommodate our situations between concurrent versus user device licenses. Now, when we move into the Citrix Workspace realm, we definitely have some awesome options there."
"Citrix is expensive."
"Clients do not pay licensing fees."
"The pricing of this product is competitive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Virtualization solutions are best for your needs.
841,164 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
7%
Financial Services Firm
19%
Government
10%
Computer Software Company
8%
Healthcare Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops?
My focus has primarily been on publishing virtual applications.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops?
I rate the product’s pricing a seven out of ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive.
What needs improvement with Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops?
I have found that Citrix DaaS is still a complex product, especially on the desktop side, which affects scalability. Although it works well on the apps side, the desktop aspect still has room for i...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Microsoft App-V?
It is way more expensive than other platforms. It is almost twice the price of other platforms. I rate the product’s pricing an eight or nine out of ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive.
What needs improvement with Microsoft App-V?
The process was streamlined but didn't make our work simple. We encountered an issue with the person responsible for designing the website. They installed a plugin that disrupted the services and m...
What is your primary use case for Microsoft App-V?
We use the solution for the Docker container.
 

Also Known As

XenDesktop, XenApp (Citrix Virtual Apps), Citrix Workspace
App-V, MS App-V
 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Exelon, Aeronamic, AIDS Healthcare Foundation, Alameda County Medical Center, Alaska Department of Fish & Game, Aloysius Stichting, Amarchand Mangaldas, AmBev, Amnet Technology Solutions, Arval
The University of Texas at San Antonio (UTSA), GDDKiA, P&V, Etisalat Lanka, Hellenic Petroleum
Find out what your peers are saying about Citrix DaaS (formerly Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops service) vs. Microsoft App-V and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.
841,164 professionals have used our research since 2012.