Citrix DaaS (formerly Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops service) Reviews

We use application virtualization capabilities and on-premise desktop virtualization. In one of the companies, we are using remote PC access or remote access to physical desktops. We used cloud-hosted desktop virtualization for a PoC.

Our organization has over 15 companies all over the eastern region. We are in manufacturing, distribution, technology, and many more things.

It provides the flexibility of being used on any device. It is good in terms of user experience. Generally, if you want to run an application over the internet on your virtual desktop, you need to have many things working well to have the same experience that you will have if you were are working on your own laptop. It provides a good user experience in terms of working even with not-so-high bandwidth.

There is end-to-end security not only for the application itself but also for the users. We need to ensure that the applications are always protected and the connection between the user and the application is also protected. 

Integration with the cloud provides a seamless experience. You can publish applications over the cloud, and you can access the workspace and your application on your computer, your laptop, your tab or iPad, or on mobile devices. It works well with your Apple, Android, or Windows devices. It works with everything. There is also a system where you can remotely assist any person who is running any specific application.

There is good integration between Citrix and Microsoft applications. You can also optimize the user experience with certain configurations. Security plays a very important role in working with Citrix in terms of dealing with group policies, legal policies, and application policies. You can apply the required policies. For example, you can have a clipboard policy where people cannot copy or screenshot stuff.

It is very easy when it comes to the deployment and management of hybrid cloud apps and desktops. You are working only in one console, and it is straightforward. You can see everything there. You can see the policies, rules, profiles, and whether you want to have it on the cloud or on-prem.

When it comes to the security and protection of critical business applications and desktops, 
there are certain business applications that some companies prefer not to publish or not to have on virtual desktops in the cloud. However, when we're talking on-premises solution, it can integrate with any published application. If you're working on certain projects or certain versions, you will not have any issues in terms of the version because the configuration is based on the server and not on the client PC. For example, some Oracle application or ERP application needs certain plugins to be available, and users didn't have those on their laptops. In spite of not having them, they were able to work on these applications through a virtual desktop.

It simplifies adherence to industry regulations for data protection and compliance with all kinds of security policies. 

It benefits the overall business operation and reduces the total time of managing big applications. The applications are available at any time of the day. Previously, if anyone lost his computer or had his computer damaged or something like that, we had to take that computer and reinstall everything for a staff member to be able to access the application, whereas now, the staff member can access the application through his phone or another computer. His information is there on the service from any place. So, it impacts the availability of applications, and it saves a lot of time to replace a damaged PC. In certain cases, it also saves a lot of cost of buying new Windows or new hardware for the applications, so we can use old laptops to run these applications. It saves time and money.

It saves the cost of buying new PCs and the maintenance. It saves 50% to 60% of the total cost of a new device that needs to be bought for any new employee or for a specific service. It saves a lot of money and reduces wastage.

It provides security of our intellectual property and data when remote employees are using the solution. The main thing is that you can create your own policies and you can specify what applications users can run based on the locations. For example, if they are working in Dubai, they don't need to access all data in Lebanon. We can create profiles and policies for them. In the group configuration, you can just integrate it with Active Directory or another security platform so that the configuration can be applied to the region.

It is very efficient to work with a thin client. There are no problems with integration with various devices.

We're running it on-prem. We are working with Hyper-V and vSphere, and we don't have any problem with that. We can run any server and storage. It can work with any hypervisor. There are no restrictions.

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.

As an admin, for managing the devices, the interface is very user-friendly. There is no problem, and it is very good.

Licensing service installation and configuration was the biggest challenge for all Citrix solutions, but now they have fixed a lot of issues.

I have been using this solution since 2013.

We have companies that have around 500 users, 100 users, and 50 users. The biggest company has around 1,000 users. This company is all across the region.

We will increase its usage depending on the business and the requirements.

They were excellent from a project management standpoint. They helped us with issues related to licensing. 

If we need any online support, they are able to provide that. Their support is fine.

I used to work with VMware Horizon.

It didn't take a lot of time. Within a week of entering into an agreement with Citrix to use their service, I was able to administer and work with it.

We had everything that we need, and their support team in Lebanon was very helpful. In less than a week, we were able to administer and install applications. At the initial stage, we also had to develop our own profiles and policies, but it was very straightforward. There was no complexity. It took around two hours for installing the Citrix and the license service, and it took around two days to configure the profiles. We had three people for deployment.

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.

I evaluated other solutions such as VMware Horizon and Microsoft Remote Desktop Services. Citrix works seamlessly on different platforms, and its bandwidth consumption is very low. Desktop profiles, integrations, and remote assistance were also the main factors for going for Citrix.

To get the benefit of the return on investment, you need to plan well in advance when to change all of the laptops, and you also need to train the users to cope with the new environment or new structure.

I would rate this solution a nine out of 10.

LG Uplus is using Citrix for internal groupware. Every employee here uses Citrix to access the VDI to make some Word documents or PowerPoint presentations. We are not allowed to use our local PC resources at all. 

The second use for my team's project is that we are reviewing the potential for a virtualization solution for our customers, who are mainly video editors. We offer them a low-price alternative. Instead of buying our high-end desktops or workstations, they can save money by virtualizing some application solutions. 

This is deployed in LG CNS, which is a subsidiary of the LG group. Most LF subsidiary companies are a part of the LG CNS solution. LG CNS solution is combined with Citrix, which means that if you work with LG CNS, you have no choice but to use Citrix.

First, since we adopted the Citrix VDI, we are no longer dealing with the problem of leaking the customer's personal information. Second, we aren't investing a lot of money in buying new personal laptops. With the VDI, we aren't relying on a high-core CPU or memory in each employee's laptop. Because the functions that require a lot of memory and CPU are happening in the cloud, we can just give the employee a basic Pentium CPU laptop.

The Virtual Desktop Interface is very important because we have many departments for customer service. For example, we have operational storage and also we have a customer call center. Most of the customers are calling about a security problem. 

Before we adopted a VDI storage solution, our customers' personal information was leaked. This happened a lot. But since we adopted a VDI solution, these kinds of issues have happened rarely. Of course, we banned each user from installing or sharing software, like peer-to-peer sharing software. There is no chance that a single user could leak personal information by mistake through unauthorized access.

Virtualized solutions are very important. Because of the high-speed internet service here, I think the virtualization application solution can be adopted in a B2C market for customer service.

We've tested a lot of cases with the Citrix solution and found that it's okay when the Citrix virtualized solution is adopted over the laptop or desktop. But it has some latency issues—a lag between the input device and screen—when we test it with a smartphone or tablet. The reason that users use the virtualized desktop is they want to access a Windows 10 application, but they need their keyboard and mouse. Every employee complains about the performance or quality of their VDI. After we adopted the security solution, I think the performance is quite better. But employees are still complaining about the speed of the VDI.

Latency is also a major problem when adopting Citrix for video editing software or 3D editing software, especially editing 4K video or large file size. The Citrix virtualized solution becomes too slow, so we cannot use the VDI. For the streaming, Citrix needs to improve its screen resolution problems because this is a market trend. We produce and use a lot of high-density videos. If Citrix cannot improve these kinds of issues, then we might not be able to use VDI anymore two or three years from now.

Citrix doesn't offer any solutions for the virtualization of macOS, either. I think we could use that kind of service.

It's been around 10 years or so.

I would rate it very low actually. Because here in Korea, most of them are for sales, not technical assistance. For developing some applications, we have to choose or test virtualized applications. But call up Citrix agencies—sales agencies—they say they cannot solve the technical issues. We have to find some technical references through the internet or through developers who have some experience with Citrix.

Internally, the IT department uses Citrix. For developing customer service for my team's product, I use Hyper-V's client solution instead of Citrix, because the price of the Citrix virtualized application solution is too high. Citrix only provides the B2B license here, so they don't have any B2C license. I use Hyper-V-based applications and virtualized solutions because of the price issues.

I think it was very complex. It was difficult to install Citrix by ourselves, but we have an IT department and a PC maintenance department. The initial setup required around three people. But after the initial deployment, most employees don't have any trouble with installing Citrix solutions. For each user, it takes around half an hour. For example, I broke my laptop and had to get a new laptop. I personally asked the IT and PC maintenance departments to install the systems again. It took them around 30 minutes.

We have a dedicated IT department. They have a contract with Citrix and they're employed here. 

It's tough to say whether we've really seen any cost savings. Many people don't believe the Citrix solution lowered the total cost of the whole system. But I think if we adopt an application virtualizing service, then we can reduce costs a little bit more. 

Currently, everyone here is using the same public cloud server resources for every software. but if we adopt a virtualized application solution, then the IT department can choose which software needs a lot of resources and which can adopt lower-tier public cloud resources. That way, we can save a lot of infrastructure costs.

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. If we compare the cost of a high-performance laptop and the price of the Citrix solution, the total cost savings is very small. But we can improve the security issue.

I think the speed and latency of Hyper-V are quite good, but one thing I worry about is the security issues. Our internally developed client for the Hyper-V solution doesn't have as many security solutions as Citrix does. As I recall, LG CNS has its own VDI solution. At this moment, there are some solutions that can replace Citrix, like FreeVDI, an open-source VDI, for example. We have tried using those kinds of service solutions in some departments, but they didn't quite meet our expectations.

I would rate Citrix seven out of 10.

We deliver mainly desktops to all of our offices, using thin clients. Since we've been working from home during the pandemic, people just use their home computers to access their desktops. We deploy a desktop full of a standard set of applications, and we have a few published applications that are not on a desktop. People access those from that desktop, and some people access them as a published application and not a desktop.

We have people who have laptops and some of them just use one or two applications, so they don't get a full desktop. They'll just VPN from their laptop and use Citrix to access those few applications.

The following represent how Citrix technology is leveraged in our organization: application virtualization capabilities, on-premise desktop virtualization, and Remote PC access or remote access to physical desktops. We don't do the latter a lot, but we do publish remote desktop as a published application. Some use remote desktop to get back to their machines. We don't use the remote PC functionality. I wish we did, personally, but those are decisions that unfortunately get made elsewhere, and RDP was chosen versus publishing them as an ICA app to people.

Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops provides the flexibility of being used on any device, which makes it easier to work for many anywhere. The transition from people working in an office every day to working from home was seamless, for the most part for us, because almost everybody has a personal computer, whether it's a PC or a Mac. We had a lot of people go out and buy Chromebooks and any other type of device that they saw fit for themselves. They just logged in to our portal and launched their desktops, like they always would. It's very flexible.

The biggest benefit was when we had that transition when offices were closed due to the pandemic. We had thin clients in the offices, so people were already using Citrix whether they were in the office or not. The flexibility provided by that alone was invaluable, in just getting people able to work from home. That's what the product is supposed to do. We didn't really have work-from-as a model. People could do it, but it wasn't a big thing for us. It was more along the lines of when you were done for the day you went home, and if you had to log back in, you could. But for the most part, people were done with work until the next day.

Citrix also plays a part in our business continuity strategies. We have in-house applications and, since we have data centers in various regions, we need the ability for a given application to be live in other data centers, even though we only currently have it running from one. vSphere is the platform that we use for virtualization so we have infrastructure that's the same in every data center. We have a Citrix environment just for DR that we can copy our vDisks into, in Provisioning Services, from one data center to the next. We can then just spin up a Citrix desktop that has access to that DR environment. The other teams then spin up their pieces of infrastructure within that DR bubble and test it. Citrix gives people the ability to quickly get into that DR environment once it has been stood up.

Another aspect is that the solution has resulted in IT efficiencies because we can be pretty agile with quickly reverting changes and quickly implementing new changes. It provides a lot of flexibility for us.

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 ability to deploy shared, hosted desktops and published applications, is also important.

And I would rate the user experience, when using the solution’s technology remotely, as high as it can be. We have offices all over the world, and some of them are in areas that have absolutely terrible internet service. For users in those areas, while we do get complaints that the experience is bad, on most days it's tolerable, and that's even on the bad days when there is extremely high latency. Especially not knowing where people are going to be working from, I would say the user experience is very good.

When it comes to the solution’s centralized policy control, as in the policies you apply to ICA sessions and session hosts or virtual desktop agents, you can control those through group policy, in addition to group policy, or put them in from the console. But either way, as a central management point for the Citrix sessions, in general, it's very good. It gives us flexibility. For example, with the users who are in the bad internet service areas, those policies give us the flexibility to lower their user experience, to dim down the graphics and sound quality. We can do that on-the-fly when they report problems. That generally helps their experience a little bit. So the policy control is good.

And if you have the full line of Citrix products deployed—NetScaler, MAS, all of those items tied together—the visibility is second to none from a monitoring perspective. We use the NetScaler and the MAS and the data that comes through there is almost invaluable, if you have the licensing to use it.

In addition, the security of your intellectual property and data when remote employees are using Citrix, is very high because, with Citrix you can limit access to the local device and access to the network, so you can't copy files if you have certain policies set between the Citrix session and the endpoint. You can prevent printing. You can prevent any data from ever leaving that desktop. And if you're licensed for it, which we are not, they've recently added the ability to watermark screenshots and to have keylog protection in Citrix sessions. If you're licensed for it, that's just an added bonus to the security features that are built-in by default.

The version of Director we're on, the 1912 version, has improved some of the monitoring capabilities that went back to what EdgeSite used to be as a product, when it comes to real-time analytics. If anything could be improved, it might be some of the Director functionality, and some of the dashboard customization, or the overall Director customization. We're limited in what we do. We use Director, as administrators, more than the service desk does, and we limit their access to Director to a few screens. They don't even get to see the full scope of what we see in there. Director is one thing that could be improved upon.

I've been using Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops for about 10 years. My first experience with any type of virtualization technology was with Citrix. My first helpdesk job was supporting a company that deployed Citrix applications specifically, not desktops. I started out doing it from a support perspective and then got into the administration and engineering side, at that same place. I've never worked on any other products like Citrix.

I would rate the stability very highly, as high as it can be, due to my long-term experience with the product and how it's evolved to the point that it's at. That rating is based on my firsthand knowledge and experience of seeing it used and implemented, day in and day out, not only here, but at other places I've been that are larger than where I am now. I have a high opinion of it in general. It's been my career choice to work specifically with Citrix products.

It scales very well. The limitations we face are our own hardware constraints, because we purchase what we need and we don't generally provide much overhead. Our scalability problems come from limitations on hardware purchases, probably due to budget. If our company doubled in size, we would not have a problem scaling what we have today to meet that. We could probably do it in a couple of days and be just as fine.

We're licensed for 3,000 users. Our primary usage is in the U.S. and the AMEA region. We have about 2,400 users in that region who are active on it at any given time. The rest of those licenses are used in the Asia Pacific region. They're not as active in Citrix because a lot of their stuff is not as centralized as our other infrastructure is. They still don't use a lot of the same stuff. But they do use Citrix for email and for a couple of other things.

We haven't used them recently, but I generally have a high opinion of Citrix technical support. They have the knowledge and give us access to the expertise. I've worked with them in the past on a lot of things and, in some instances, if not for working with them, some of the problems we faced wouldn't have been solved. We didn't have access to anyone else with that level of knowledge.

I just started here about a year ago, but I was involved in setting up the 1912 environment. The process was straightforward. While they've changed the product names over the years, the underlying architecture and the technology, for the most part, has remained the same. I know there have been technological advancements and changes in the underlying architecture, but the overall end result, and some of how it does things, has remained the same. The setup was very easy for me and I think it would be easy even for somebody who is slightly new to the product.

Our most recent deployment did not take long at all. The longest part of it was the formal requests to the other teams and having them provision the virtual machines that we requested for the infrastructure. The longest thing about the deployment for us is getting to the point where we're comfortable putting a desktop out there for user consumption. It's getting them to test and validate that we built that desktop the same as the current one they're using. It's not so much that the deployment takes long because of any Citrix product problems. It's more due to user acceptance testing of the functionality of the desktop itself and the software we use.

Four or five people are involved in deployment, between the ones on our team who build, install, and configure the various infrastructure pieces, and the people that we make requests to who build the database servers and the other virtual machines.

We deploy according to the best practices. We don't follow any specific guides, but we deploy with the minimum specs, plus what we know we need to scale for the user base that we have.

We did it ourselves.

Citrix provides everything in one integrated platform—even the lowest licensing version. It depends on your needs. But if you have the Premium Edition, it provides absolutely every tool you could need to virtualize and deploy.

I'm not involved with the licensing, purchasing, or cost-comparison types of discussions. I'm primarily on the technical side. But I would imagine the integrated platform plays a large part in providing value. Citrix is a leader in this space. Our company has to see some value in the product to pay for it as it is. I would always advocate for it over other similar products.

If you're looking at implementing it, plan as best you can at all levels. Citrix has its consulting methodology for how to properly plan and deploy an environment. I've been in a lot of places where I haven't seen the planning phase happening. Planning goes a long way towards a successful deployment, because you test a lot of things during the testing phase of that, in particular. You see things that you wouldn't otherwise see if you just built it and threw it out there and said, "Hey, use this." You would run into a lot of problems that you wouldn't understand, things that need to be tweaked for any deployment, no matter where you're deploying it. There is a set of standard things that you need to do. Planning goes a long way towards making sure that it's not only accepted by your end users but that it's supportable.

Access control comes into play because we have different Citrix environments for different regions and they don't really cross-talk. We do limit certain things to certain environments, or some things are only available from one environment. People from the other environments have to access it from a different environment, but to them it's seamless because they're all behind the same store-front environments.

We were used to working on different proposals and implementations from Citrix through the GSI partnership.

It integrates various tools and features into a single platform. It offers enhanced user experience, productivity tools, VDI, and virtualized applications. This unified platform provides a single pane of glass, allowing management and control.

Remote work has been enhanced. Citrix Workspace and Virtual Desktops offer various features, including persistent and non-persistent environments, allowing different user personas to access their work environment efficiently. These solutions enhance the user experience, especially for remote work, which significantly improved during the COVID-19 pandemic. Additionally, Citrix has integrated many enhancements into its products. Applications can be provisioned through published or streamed apps via Citrix Virtual Desktops. 

Recently, 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. This shift has created numerous opportunities for migration from Citrix or VMware to Microsoft and other platforms.

I have been using Citrix Workspace as a partner for two years.

We recommend Citrix Workspace primarily to BFSI customers, followed by financial institutions, media and entertainment organizations, and oil and gas corporations. Virtualized infrastructure is already in place for most of the verticals we work with.

Our company has Level 1, Level 2, and Level 3 support teams, which can provide the necessary support for Citrix Workspace.

Citrix had its licensing model, which also worked with Microsoft user licenses. This collaboration between Microsoft and Citrix created a consortium that handled the licensing. However, Citrix has changed its licensing model due to a recent merger. Comparing the earlier Citrix days to the current situation post-merger, there is a significant difference in Citrix's licensing prices. 

Citrix Workspace is a suite of solutions. With a single pane of glass, administrators can monitor the Citrix environment to identify and resolve any issues or bottlenecks. This setup enhances user experience through Citrix Analytics dashboards, which provide insights into the Zen desktop environment. These dashboards allow you to pinpoint real-time issues that may affect users or applications. Citrix Workspace functions as a unified solution, though you can also opt for Citrix Workspace apps and desktops separately. By choosing Citrix Workspace, you benefit from administration, management, and user experience.

Citrix Workspace can be recommended for remote work requirements. However, given the current market conditions and the various options available, it is important to consider cost-effectiveness and suitability. There are also some cheaper options.

If they can make it comparative, then it's a perfect solution.

We usually recommend Microsoft AVD solutions based on customer suitability. Everything is there with AVD because of the combination of Azure, the robust security, and everything borrowed from Microsoft. When integrated with Microsoft, Citrix Workspace complements Microsoft's zero-trust security model by enhancing authentication and authorization processes. Historically, Microsoft and Citrix have collaborated to provide comprehensive solutions to customers, combining their strengths to deliver robust security and efficient management.

We recommend Microsoft AVD. The majority of our customers also use Citrix. There are some VMware Horizon View customers, but their numbers are currently very low due to recent acquisitions. As a result of these acquisitions, many customers are considering moving away from VMware.

I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

We are using Citrix for remote connectivity. We have multiple types that are deployed in different clients. Some are desktops as services, some as workspaces, et cetera.

Our company is procuring the license for it; the customer is using it.

It's for engineers to remotely connect to the console or desktop of the client or the customer side for debugging or resolving issues. That's where we use it primarily.

The remote desktop connectivity is where we have our focus. That's the main use case. 

The product is stable.

We've never had scalability issues.

We want to reduce costs. They should offer a different pricing model. 

Some manual work is required now with Citrix, like installing some client agents, et cetera, which could be automated. We'd really like to see more automation in the future. 

It is not easy to set up. 

It's part of our application, so we've been working with the product for more than a year or so.

So far, the solution has been quite stable. I would rate it eight out of ten. There aren't bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

We haven't had any issues with scalability. That said, scaling also depends on how many users are trying to access it at a given time. As we move some of these applications to the cloud, we will face the scalability question. However, those issues will be addressed later. 

We currently have hundreds, or even thousands, of users on the solution right now.

Technical support is good. I would rate them eight out of ten. 

Positive

I've also worked with AWS Workspaces. I also have experience with Microsoft Remote Desktop Services.

I haven't previously worked with any other solution in this company.

The initial setup is not easy. For example, there are agents that need to be deployed and the agent deployment has some issues when the customer has certain patching or operating systems that are not compatible. 

While this solution is mostly on-prem, we are working to move more toward the cloud. We'll have to explore how we can leverage cloud capabilities in the future. 

I'm not sure how long the deployment takes precisely. 

There are a few ways customers may save costs by using this solution. 

It's basically to maintain the applications, especially medical devices. Typically, one way the product can save a company money is if a person would traditionally have to go to the site and find the problem. If there is no option for remote connectivity or desktop, then that can be expensive. That will add to the costs. 

A second issue is uptime. If you don't have the capability to jump on a machine and start troubleshooting right away, then it'll take more time to get the system up if something happens.

We'd like the solution to be less expensive and are looking for alternative options. The cost is on the higher side. We pay for the licensing on an annual basis.

The technical support costs depend on the contract. We have separate contracts that are different based on the customer. If the contract covers technical support, that is fine, however, if it's a basic contract, then we have to pay for the technical support.

I cannot speak to the exact amount the company pays at this time. 

We now want to see the other options in the market and make some comparisons. As we go forward with the next application, we will probably look at the whole picture and see the best product, especially from a feature and host perspective.

We need to see what's there in the market and which has less manual work. We want to see how we can reduce costs and also improve the overall CI/CD process of packaging something with the customer.

We're a partner. We are using Citrix both for ourselves and our customers. 

Citrix is one of the pioneers in this area and has been around for a long time. The technical support is good. From a usability standpoint, it's also good; however, there are some aspects, like hosting, and especially on-prem deployments, where some manual work is needed. It could be that we are not doing as per the latest guidelines or something, which we need to look at and see what we can improve. That said, overall, it's a good product for remote connectivity and remote desktop applications.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten. 

I use it for VDI; it's a virtual desktop community.

It's a full SSL solution, so no additional VPN or security features can be added. The solution itself provides SSL connectivity. It's a good solution.

It would be great if they included VPN features and improved connectivity.

I have been using it for four years now.

It is stable once configured.

It is a scalable solution. There are around a thousand end users. 

It is regularly used. We plan to expand its usage in the future.

We have vendor support. Because it's a new solution for us, we wanted support directly from the vendor until we build internal capacity.

The tech support is fast, knowledgeable, and customer-friendly.

The initial setup's complexity depends on your expertise. It should be done by an expert. For our team, we have an expert who handles installation and deployment.

So, it was straightforward for us.

It integrates smoothly with our existing infrastructure without needing additional resources. It's straightforward.

We have seven experts who manage everything from the Citrix side. It depends on the client's interests and requirements.

It is good in ROI aspect for our case.

Overall, I would rate it a nine out of ten. I would recommend it if anyone with VDI connectivity use case wants to use it.

If a client wants remote connectivity and resource sharing, I recommend Citrix. VMware Horizon is another option with similar features. It depends on the requirements.

I use the solution in my company for hybrid users and support.

The most valuable feature of the solution stems from the convenience and the ease of setup the tool provides.

From an improvement perspective, I want to have multiple logins in one JUMP file, if possible. Nowadays in my company, we have to spare one PC as a jump point for the user. My company's purpose is to have multiple jump points. Improvements are required to be made in the solution since, presently, with the tool, hybrid users have to get involved with multiple logins.

In the future, the product should have some mobile applications. Though in our company, we can use the product through mobile by using Microsoft desktop, the screen is not that friendly enough.

I have been using Citrix Workspace for two years.

Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

Scalability-wise, I rate the solution as seven and a half out of ten. There are some issues with the product's scalability, considering that Citrix found a loophole in the solution after my company had used it for two years. My organization needs to see whether the loophole found by Citrix is dangerous and whether we will be exposed to vulnerabilities. Most organizations use Citrix Workspace with standard settings and as per what is suggested by Citrix.

More than 1,000 people use the tool in my company.

I rate the technical support a nine out of ten. I am happy with the support offered by the product.

Positive

I have experience with Microsoft Remote Desktop. If I compare Microsoft Remote Desktop and Citrix Workspace, I would say that Microsoft Remote Desktop is used internally in our company. Citrix offers license-based tools. In our company, we prefer using Microsoft Remote Desktop. Microsoft Remote Desktop uses more resources and networks compared to Citrix. Citrix offers more optimized solutions.

The product's initial setup phase is simple and easy.

The solution is deployed on the hybrid model.

If one is a high price and ten is a low price, I rate the tool's price a three.

In terms of security features, the product offers MFA functionalities. Citrix has yet to disclose some issues with the tool's security features. I heard that Citrix found some loopholes in the product, and they have yet to be covered up.

The product can be easily integrated with other tools.

I recommend the tool to others.

I rate the tool a seven out of ten.

We use Citrix for VDI and publishing applications. My company only has 50 users, but some of my customers have more than 10,000 users.

Remote access is useful.  

Citrix is a highly mature product, but they could always add more benefits by acquiring a third-party software product to integrate with their their solution and make it more complete.

I think they can improve the troubleshooting to make it easier for users to solve problems on their own. For example, it could provide an error code and some instructions on how to reconnect to the database or do something proactive to fix the issue with the system.

I have been using Citrix for more than 20 years.

Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops is a backbone platform that organizations rely on. If Citrix is down, then the organization can't function, so it must be a stable solution. If we are working in a thousand-user organization and Citrix goes down, then 1000 employees are left idle.

If you can afford the licenses, you can scale Citrix up as much as you want. 

The initial setup is easy and only takes two or three hours. The most complex task is coordinating between the golden image and organizational resources. You need to install all the organization's applications and adjust the settings to meet the company's needs. Setting up a Citrix farm takes less than five hours, but tailoring it to the organization requires another three or four days.

The Citrix license model has changed. It costs around $240 per user for a single username, but a concurrent license costs double.

I rate Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops nine out of 10. This is the leading solution in the world for remote work. Citrix has had the top remote display for the last 20 years, and there is a huge technological gap between Citrix and its competitors. However, Citrix doesn't have the same level of marketing as its competitors. Many times, people don't realize that Citrix is the best until they've deployed it.

I recommend taking advantage of Citrix eLearning online courses. Four or five days of online training can help you overcome a lot of shortcomings, but you need two or three years of experience working with the Citrix system and infrastructure to be a system admin.