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

Citrix DaaS (formerly Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops service) vs Numecent comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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
6.5
Number of Reviews
125
Ranking in other categories
Remote Access (5th), Virtual Desktop Infrastructure (VDI) (3rd), Desktop as a Service (DaaS) (1st)
Numecent
Ranking in Application Virtualization
5th
Average Rating
9.0
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2025, in the Application Virtualization category, the mindshare of Citrix DaaS (formerly Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops service) is 27.2%, down from 31.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Numecent is 12.1%, up from 8.8% 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.
it_user749919 - PeerSpot reviewer
Being able to deploy applications which use drivers has allowed us to virtualise more applications than with other solutions
Isolation layering Driver virtualisation Licence management Usage tracking Plugin integration Being able to deploy applications which use drivers has allowed us to virtualise more applications than with other solutions. Self-service Portal. More than eight years. No. No. No, it scales very…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Getting access to the applications for which we otherwise have to be on-site is probably the biggest advantage"
"The Provisioning Services are the most valuable feature. We have Premium licensing, so Provisioning Services is huge for us, along with the Virtual Apps and Desktops part. It allows us to have a vDisk for every region, one that can easily be copied between them if we need to, to limit the amount of updates we have to do."
"The ease of access and the confidentiality and security that it provides is what we like best."
"Citrix is used by many organizations to make it possible to streamline the way different developers work together from different locations."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is that it supports team clients."
"I found the ease of deployment, scalability, and security to be to our benefit when supplying virtual applications to our clients."
"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 improvement in scalability. Managing multiple OSs centrally doesn't reduce many problems, and the product remains almost on par with its competitors like VMware Vue."
"The initial setup is easy."
"Driver virtualisation"
 

Cons

"For us, pricing is the most important feature to improve."
"The lag when using Skype or Screen Sharing with multiple users needs to improve, as it makes it difficult for us to continue when we have to restart the system."
"Where improvement could be driven is in terms of clarity as to the functionality of some of the solutions. If you go back to the older Citrix Xen products that we had, we understood those really well. As we've come into the new workstation premium suite, there is a lot of additional functionality that we perhaps have not yet fully exploited. It is not because we can't, but simply because we don't yet understand the depth of functionality that's offered."
"The user profiles could use some improvement."
"Licensing service installation and configuration was the biggest challenge for all Citrix solutions, but now they have fixed a lot of issues."
"I would like to see simplification in the management of the on-prem infrastructure component of Citrix DaaS, particularly in the studio tool used to manage the DaaS infrastructure."
"Citrix has undergone significant changes, primarily due to its acquisition. This acquisition impacted Citrix's value because of increased licensing costs under the new model. As a result, many customers are now considering alternatives to Citrix."
"It takes time to load."
"Self-service Portal."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We don't have a lot to compare it to, but we certainly think whatever we pay is worthwhile at this point in time. It's very reasonable."
"As for the cost, it is neither cheap nor expensive. Personally, I find it quite expensive, especially if you want to add more features. The security features we use include App Protect and Endpoint Protection."
"The Citrix license model has changed. It costs around $240 per user for a single username, but a concurrent license costs double."
"If one is a high price and ten is a low price, I rate the tool's price a three."
"We are seeing a return on investment with Citrix Workspace."
"It is a bit costly, but enterprise class features come with a cost."
"It is quite expensive, but so are the competitors on the market."
"In the past, the prices of the product were great. With the acquisition of Citrix by your company, the prices have drastically increased. For my company, it has become a bit of a problem to sell products from Citrix."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Virtualization solutions are best for your needs.
831,158 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
8%
Financial Services Firm
37%
Energy/Utilities Company
8%
Government
6%
Computer Software 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...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops, XenDesktop, XenApp (Citrix Virtual Apps), Citrix Workspace
No data available
 

Learn More

Video not available
 

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
Kingston University London, Construction Executive, Ascentech K.K, Fast Company, Geekout365
Find out what your peers are saying about Citrix, Microsoft, Parallels and others in Application Virtualization. Updated: January 2025.
831,158 professionals have used our research since 2012.