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

Citrix DaaS (formerly Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops service) vs Nutanix Frame 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 Desktop as a Service (DaaS)
1st
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
125
Ranking in other categories
Application Virtualization (1st), Remote Access (5th), Virtual Desktop Infrastructure (VDI) (3rd)
Nutanix Frame
Ranking in Desktop as a Service (DaaS)
5th
Average Rating
8.8
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2025, in the Desktop as a Service (DaaS) category, the mindshare of Citrix DaaS (formerly Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops service) is 32.0%, up from 30.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Nutanix Frame is 5.2%, up from 4.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Desktop as a Service (DaaS)
 

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.
Hamada Farag - PeerSpot reviewer
A cost-effective and streamlined virtual desktop infrastructure solution with a user-friendly interface and simplified management
The singular management interface is crucial, particularly for the operations team as it minimizes complexity and enhances operational efficiency. The simplicity of the management tools is a key highlight, especially when compared to other solutions like Citrix, where there is often complexity due to various components such as controllers, storefronts, and different servers.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Citrix Workspace allows you to work in a remote environment and gives you data security."
"We've been able to scale the environment quite nicely by using the Citrix Remote PC. I can't say enough about that. And because that relies on utilizing your existing hardware resources, and making those available as a part of your Citrix farm — with a second level of authentication and security pieces around it — we added some 4,000 workstations without an additional overhead or cost."
"The product is stable."
"Stable product with straightforward setup."
"My focus has primarily been on publishing virtual applications."
"The most beneficial feature is seamless remote access, particularly for applications rather than full endpoints. Security features include full data encryption and integrated SSL VPN through NetScaler for secure access."
"Its user-friendliness is most valuable. It was easy to log in and navigate. Some of such solutions are not very user-friendly, but this one was."
"The architecture I built had a robust failover mechanism for the endpoints, and the interface was user-friendly."
"The scalability of the solution is quite good."
"Nutanix Frame is easy to install, manage, and upgrade."
"The pricing of the solution and management are good features."
"The singular management interface is crucial, particularly for the operations team as it minimizes complexity and enhances operational efficiency."
 

Cons

"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."
"Citrix should consolidate the multiple tools currently required into a single platform."
"Citrix Workforce is good, but it needs improvement in diagnosing network issues. When errors occur, it is difficult to determine if they're due to network issues, Workspace issues, or environment issues"
"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."
"The product has some bugs, making it an area of concern where improvements are required."
"We're running into all kinds of speed issues and reliability issues. There are frequent disconnects, and we're not sure whether that's a problem with the product, with the way the product has been deployed, or with server capacity or bandwidth. Our IT department pays attention to that, but we are feeling the impact of that."
"Pricing and technical support needs improvement."
"The cost of Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops is high and has room for improvement."
"The solution’s pricing could be improved."
"It would be highly beneficial if they could offer a version that is entirely on-premises, eliminating the need for cloud connection except for data access."
"The solution can be made faster and it should improve performance wise."
"As the solution is not completely straightforward, you do need some experience to configure and implement it."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Citrix is a mid-range cost solution compared to some others out there."
"The price of Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops is approximately $300 for the new version called Dash and the license is approximately $900 annually."
"We recouped 60 to 70 percent of the hardware costs."
"You can buy an on-cloud or on-prem license. You can switch between on-cloud users and on-prem users. Its licensing is cheap. It is from $8 to $15 per user. It is not that expensive when you compare the cost of buying new hardware with the cost of the license. For example, at $15 per user, it costs around $180 for a year, which is cheaper than buying a $600 PC that at a certain stage, you will again have to change because its hardware is not supported. It may also get damaged or stolen. So, you can compare the cost of the actual hardware that you have to buy and the time spent in supporting the clients with the cost of its license."
"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."
"We're paying for a standard license and, in my view, the price is too high. I would be satisfied with it if it were reduced by about 20-30%. Right now, I would rate the pricing a five out of ten."
"The Citrix license model has changed. It costs around $240 per user for a single username, but a concurrent license costs double."
"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."
"The licensing is based on the number of users of the solution."
"Nutanix Frame is a very expensive solution."
"It is a cost-effective option with comparable functionality to competitors."
"The pricing of the solution is very good."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Desktop as a Service (DaaS) 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%
Government
17%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
9%
 

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 do you like most about Nutanix Frame?
Nutanix Frame is easy to install, manage, and upgrade.
What is your primary use case for Nutanix Frame?
Nutanix Frame can be used to transition hardware and replace traditional hardware architecture like physical servers, storage, and SAN switches.
 

Also Known As

XenDesktop, XenApp (Citrix Virtual Apps), Citrix Workspace
Nutanix Xi Frame
 

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
JetBlue, International Speedway Corporation, SAIC Volkswagen
Find out what your peers are saying about Citrix DaaS (formerly Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops service) vs. Nutanix Frame and other solutions. Updated: January 2025.
838,713 professionals have used our research since 2012.