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

Citrix DaaS (formerly Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops service) vs Red Hat Enterprise Virtualization for Desktops comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 5, 2024
 

Categories and Ranking

Citrix DaaS (formerly Citri...
Ranking in Virtual Desktop Infrastructure (VDI)
3rd
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
124
Ranking in other categories
Application Virtualization (1st), Remote Access (5th), Desktop as a Service (DaaS) (1st)
Red Hat Enterprise Virtuali...
Ranking in Virtual Desktop Infrastructure (VDI)
12th
Average Rating
7.0
Reviews Sentiment
2.4
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2024, in the Virtual Desktop Infrastructure (VDI) category, the mindshare of Citrix DaaS (formerly Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops service) is 9.7%, down from 14.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Red Hat Enterprise Virtualization for Desktops is 0.9%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Virtual Desktop Infrastructure (VDI)
 

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.
RobertThompson 1 - PeerSpot reviewer
Free version available but hard to understand
Personally, I don't think it has any commendable features. The biggest thing about it is that, compared to what you can do with VMware and Horizon, it just seems like there's an awful lot of extra work involved with the Red Hat virtualization. It doesn't just work out of the box. You have to read through about six different documents, and everybody's experience is different. So it's kind of annoying. That would be the main thing. If you're not a Linux geek, it's very hard to understand. And it's probably because I came out of the Windows world. I learned this as part of my cross-training, but I just found the way that it happens with VMware and all that stuff to be easier to use.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It provides all of the features required for the protection of data. For example, we don't want to allow any copy/paste of data to an outside environment, and we are able to restrict the VDI to not allow any data transfer from the VDI to the local laptop's hard drives. That is one of the greatest advantages the solution provides."
"It virtualizes the application on your desktop."
"The App is the most valuable feature."
"The app protection feature is one of the most valuable because it provides good security, as nobody is going to be able to look into your screen while you are sharing the screen. And if someone has installed a keylogger in your system, your keystrokes will be jumbled up and they would not make any sense to the keylogger. App protection is one of the coolest security features that I have encountered on any platform."
"The initial setup is easy."
"My focus has primarily been on publishing virtual applications."
"The most valuable feature is the gateway to a remote connection, to a physical or a virtual PC. Compared to a normal VPN client and connection, the connection via Citrix is more stable and does not consume as much network bandwidth."
"Centralization and security are the most valuable features of Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops."
"There's lots of good support out there in the community."
"The improvement to our organization is managing all our KVM-based virtual machines in a management environment."
"The most valuable features are automated deployment and transparent movement for virtual machines over all our locations."
 

Cons

"Using the app layering feature can be quite difficult and cumbersome."
"The product's technical support services need improvement."
"Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops are not easy to set up. However, I have the experience and I can do it easily. It could be easier to set up."
"I heard that Citrix found some loopholes in the product, and they have yet to be covered up."
"The speed and connectivity of Citrix DaaS could be improved."
"This solution is resource-intensive, it takes a lot of Bandwidth and a lot of the resources of the server."
"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."
"Citrix duplicates multiple processes."
"The best improvement for oVirt 4.2 is to enable backup features for major backup products of virtual machines."
"The biggest thing about it is that, compared to what you can do with VMware and Horizon, it just seems like there's an awful lot of extra work involved with Red Hat virtualization."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We have more than a million seats under management so we get the best price."
"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'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 purchase price was around $300,000 USD and then the maintenance fees were 20%. There are no other additional fees."
"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 licenses are affordable, but the support is a bit expensive, though worth the value.​"
"The solution is expensive and I give the cost a four out of ten."
"I use the free developer stuff right now."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Virtual Desktop Infrastructure (VDI) solutions are best for your needs.
816,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Government
8%
University
19%
Manufacturing Company
15%
Computer Software Company
13%
Government
11%
 

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 needs improvement with Red Hat Enterprise Virtualization for Desktops?
Personally, I don't think it has any commendable features. The biggest thing about it is that, compared to what you can do with VMware and Horizon, it just seems like there's an awful lot of extra ...
What is your primary use case for Red Hat Enterprise Virtualization for Desktops?
I've used it more as a user than as an administrator setting it up. Just mainly getting access to legacy systems and programming that's not Windows 11 compatible.
 

Also Known As

Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops, XenDesktop, XenApp (Citrix Virtual Apps), Citrix Workspace
Enterprise Virtualization for Desktops
 

Learn More

 

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
Casio, Telef‹nica, British Airways
Find out what your peers are saying about Citrix DaaS (formerly Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops service) vs. Red Hat Enterprise Virtualization for Desktops and other solutions. Updated: October 2024.
816,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.