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 February 2025, in the Application Virtualization category, the mindshare of Citrix DaaS (formerly Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops service) is 27.2%, down from 31.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Numecent is 12.7%, up from 9.1% 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

"It is a very scalable solution."
"With this product, everyone can have a similar kind of desktop environment."
"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."
"The product is stable."
"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."
"Remote work has been enhanced"
"It is a lightweight application that incorporates multi-factor authentication."
"In terms of Citrix Workforce features, the most valuable for managing our remote workforce is security, especially AppProtect. Users cannot simply copy and paste data to their local devices. This prevents data breaches, as data can't be copied to OneDrive or Google Drive. Screenshots from local PCs are also blocked, though data can still be manually copied using a phone."
"Driver virtualisation"
 

Cons

"I heard that Citrix found some loopholes in the product, and they have yet to be covered up."
"The initial setup has room for improvement."
"The product advances really fast. For some customers, we need better backwards compatibility."
"Scalability depends on the server and the number of users in the organization."
"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."
"The cost of Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops is high and has room for improvement."
"They need to adapt more quickly to the latest additions to the Microsoft operating system. If Windows 10 comes out with a new version, there are compatibility issues and it takes them a lot of time to release an update."
"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."
"Self-service Portal."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The tool is expensive."
"Citrix solutions cost a lot in comparison with competitors, like Azure Virtual Desktop or VMware Horizon. Those solutions cost around 50 to 60 percent less, per month per user, than Citrix."
"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."
"Citrix licensing is expensive."
"It's my understanding that the solution license fee for each user is around $300 US. If we buy a personal laptop for each employee every five years, then the total cost is five times $300 US, or $1,500 USD. So we could buy 100 personal laptops instead of the Citrix solution."
"The price of the solution could be less expensive. There are different versions to their solution and the price keeps increasing."
"The Citrix license model has changed. It costs around $240 per user for a single username, but a concurrent license costs double."
"The pricing is a little bit high, but it's good value for the product's stability and efficiency."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Virtualization solutions are best for your needs.
838,713 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
33%
Energy/Utilities Company
13%
Computer Software Company
6%
Government
5%
 

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

XenDesktop, XenApp (Citrix Virtual Apps), Citrix Workspace
No data 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: February 2025.
838,713 professionals have used our research since 2012.