Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops vs Microsoft Remote Desktop Services
We performed a comparison between Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops and Microsoft Remote Desktop Services based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Many PeerSpot users use Microsoft Remote Desktop Services as it is already embedded into their Microsoft operating systems (at no additional cost) and can scale on demand. The PeerSpot users that work outside of the Microsoft universe choose Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops due to its excellent virtualization capabilities and that it is a mature, reliable solution.
"XenApp is a fast, secure and reliable solution for remote connections that is completely different than and superior to older Windows solutions."
"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."
"XenDesktop has helped our users to work remotely with a better user experience."
"The only thing that is really important for me is being able to connect from wherever I am. It is important for me because sometimes I am in places where there are not enough safe conditions to be able to work safely, in terms of security and confidentiality of my data. Being able to access internal resources from a secure platform allows me to work without fearing that my data has been stolen."
"You can connect to any printer, and from anywhere you can print documents using a compressed channel. It is easy and the bandwidth is very low."
"It has very good performance in delivering 3D applications over WAN."
"Because of the solution's ubiquity, it is easier to find answers to problems than with competitive products."
"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."
More Citrix DaaS (formerly Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops service) Pros →
"It's simple to set up."
"We have scaled the solution and find this easy to do."
"The most valuable feature is the remote application access."
"The solution is easy to use."
"The most valuable feature is performance."
"Installing Microsoft Desktop Services is straightforward."
"The most valuable feature is that it gives me full accessibility to my servers."
"We use it to connect to the legacy system."
"In the bank, a major part of all our applications is Microsoft App-V. If App-V is at end of life, then we need a new technology to replace it. As of today, I haven't seen in Citrix Studio that there is a new technology embedded directly in it to replace App-V."
"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."
"Their customer support can be improved a lot as it lacks a lot of knowledgeable help."
"Pricing and technical support needs improvement."
"Scalability depends on the server and the number of users in the organization."
"I have to re-enter my user password when I am not using the tool for some time around ten minutes. I want to also improve the need to download other Citrix apps."
"Using the app layering feature can be quite difficult and cumbersome."
"The product should expand its capabilities for integrating with other environments."
More Citrix DaaS (formerly Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops service) Cons →
"The performance of Remote Desktop Services could be better."
"We are searching for a product with better remote access and remote sessions."
"The training profiles could be better."
"It could be more user-friendly."
"Lacks a notification feature when internet is down."
"The administrative functionality is not enough for me."
"Microsoft still has some really bad remote desktop appliance for Mac."
"Its look and feel could be updated. In Azure Remote Desktop Services (RDS), which is a VDI solution, we would like to see linked clones. It is a Hyper-V solution, and it doesn't support linked clones and uses a lot of storage. That's why we don't use it. VMware has a similar solution that supports linked clones for the master image."
More Citrix DaaS (formerly Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops service) Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Microsoft Remote Desktop Services Pricing and Cost Advice →
Citrix DaaS (formerly Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops service) is ranked 3rd in Remote Access with 92 reviews while Microsoft Remote Desktop Services is ranked 2nd in Remote Access with 76 reviews. Citrix DaaS (formerly Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops service) is rated 8.4, while Microsoft Remote Desktop Services is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Citrix DaaS (formerly Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops service) writes "Flexible Deployment, reliable performance, and fast transmission speeds". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Remote Desktop Services writes "Easy to set up and reliable, but needs an additional control panel". Citrix DaaS (formerly Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops service) is most compared with Amazon Appstream, VMware Horizon View, Amazon WorkSpaces, Citrix Workspace and BeyondTrust Privileged Remote Access, whereas Microsoft Remote Desktop Services is most compared with TeamViewer, VMware Horizon, Citrix Workspace, VMware Workstation and OpenText Exceed TurboX. See our Citrix DaaS (formerly Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops service) vs. Microsoft Remote Desktop Services report.
See our list of best Remote Access vendors and best Virtual Desktop Infrastructure (VDI) vendors.
We monitor all Remote Access reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
