We performed a comparison between Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops and Teamviewer based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Since Citrix appears to be more difficult to deploy, Teamviewer ultimately wins out in this comparison.
"It virtualizes the application on your desktop."
"ICA/HDX optimization policies."
"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."
"Citrix is used by many organizations to make it possible to streamline the way different developers work together from different locations."
"The shadow feature is extraordinary and helps a lot when supporting remote users."
"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."
"It has the best remote working features."
"It has very good performance in delivering 3D applications over WAN."
More Citrix DaaS (formerly Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops service) Pros →
"The product allows easy access to any system in case of any issues."
"It is quite simple to set up."
"The most valuable features of TeamViewer are the ease of connecting to remote computers. I do not need a lot of information about their computers to connect, a nontechnical person can give me the information needed for me to connect. Additionally, the solution does not gather other system information about the host or client's systems as other solutions might, such as AnyDesk."
"The quality of the call and the quality of the sharing have been excellent."
"The most valuable feature of TeamViewer is the remote access connection. Additionally, it is easy to use."
"The most valuable feature of TeamViewer is its ease of use."
"I am satisfied with TeamViewer, and its performance."
"The most valuable features of I use TeamViewer are the ease of access and frequent updates."
"Templating the deployment process could use improvement. When you start, there are a large number of details that are quite client-specific, although they do share common themes. To get somebody up and running in a day is very difficult to do. They should streamline by use case."
"There is room for improvement on the hypervisor side, providing better integration between the hypervisor and the product line. I suspect that they haven't put the work into that because of the move to the cloud. They want everything to be cloud-hosted. But for folks like us, who will always be a hybrid model, that's of some concern."
"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."
"Direct connection of USB devices on the terminals to be used by streamed applications is very important for printing and the usage of token authentication, but the current version does not support this one hundred percent."
"Our experience of Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops is good, but the environment can become complex and difficult to manage at times."
"We have had issues with certain aspects, which is why we are looking for alternatives. For example, the firewall solution from Citrix is a bit complicated. Integration is hard."
"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."
"The speed and connectivity of Citrix DaaS could be improved."
More Citrix DaaS (formerly Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops service) Cons →
"I don’t see any areas where improvement is needed."
"TeamViewer can improve connectivity. I had some problems connecting to my clients and now I use AnyDesk."
"Voice communication and screen communication or face-to-face communication could be improved."
"TeamViewer can improve by making the interface more user-friendly. It looks very basic, they can make it more modern and easy to use."
"This solution could be improved by offering more flexibility in terms of usage."
"We'd like to be able to work from mobile to desktop and vice versa. We'd like more mobility."
"TeamViewer could improve by having a cloud version. Having the solution on the system could cause some cyber security concerns with data."
"The solution could have better scalability."
More Citrix DaaS (formerly Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops service) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Citrix DaaS (formerly Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops service) is ranked 3rd in Remote Access with 90 reviews while TeamViewer is ranked 1st in Remote Access with 85 reviews. Citrix DaaS (formerly Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops service) is rated 8.4, while TeamViewer is rated 8.6. 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 TeamViewer writes "Solid cross-platform remote control, but with kludgy central management and some serious feature issues on macOS". Citrix DaaS (formerly Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops service) is most compared with Amazon Appstream, VMware Horizon View, Citrix Workspace, Amazon WorkSpaces and OpenText Exceed TurboX, whereas TeamViewer is most compared with TeamViewer Tensor, Microsoft Remote Desktop Services, Parallels Access, ISL Online and Zoom. See our Citrix DaaS (formerly Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops service) vs. TeamViewer report.
See our list of best Remote Access 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.