IT Central Station is now PeerSpot: Here's why
Buyer's Guide
Application Virtualization
July 2022
Get our free report covering VMware, Citrix, Microsoft, and other competitors of Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops. Updated: July 2022.
619,967 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Read reviews of Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops alternatives and competitors

Basil Dange - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Manager at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Top 5Leaderboard
Supports multifactor authentication and clientless login, but the GUI should be more user-friendly
Pros and Cons
  • "Organizations that already use the Check Point NGFW Solution do not require any additional hardware, which makes the implementation straightforward and reduces the time to go live."
  • "The fully-featured security module is only supported on Windows and Mac systems, which means that organizations with Linux will face issues providing secure access."

What is our primary use case?

We use Check Point Remote Access VPN to provide access to our corporate network and resources to remote users in a secure way. Users have access that is limited or defined by the server.

Access is granted for identified devices post-posture validation. 

Access should be provided via VPN using multifactor authentication other than username/credentials. Users are able to connect from anywhere at anytime using both mechanisms (i.e. User VPN client or browser). 

This solution mitigates or minimizes data leakage issues.

It is stable and scalable and requires minimal management and access provisioning.

How has it helped my organization?

This solution has improved our organization by providing access to corporate resources in a secure fashion. It uses complete end-to-end encryption from the end-user machine to the VPN device.

Access policies are created on the firewall for restricting access to resources and applications based on the user profile/policy.

Our security gateway is integrated with Active Directory and access to resources/applications is provided based on the security group created in Active directory.

This product has inbuild/native integration with MFA solutions.  

It does not require any additional hardware in cases where the organization already has the Check Point NGFW. The mobile access blade and remote access VPN can be enabled on the same security gateway. Check Point provides a common dashboard and management console used in conjunction with the NGFW.

Multiple access can be provided using multiple realms, based on the user ID or security group, and access can be provided accordingly. Each realm will have a pool of IP addresses for which access will be provisioned on the firewall.

What is most valuable?

Organizations that already use the Check Point NGFW Solution do not require any additional hardware, which makes the implementation straightforward and reduces the time to go live. The only requirement is to purchase an additional license from Check Point, and then enable the mobile access blade. After this, the solution is ready to roll out and provide access based on the configured policy. 

Access is restricted based on user ID, security group, and device type. 

Access is provisioned post-posture policy validation and it offers protection against users connecting to the corporate network from non-corporate devices, which minimizes data leakage possibilities. 

Access is available from browsers or VPN clients using MFA. This is helpful in cases where the machine does not have the client installed or the client is corrupted.

We are able to restrict access based on geo-location and device type. Devices can be Android, iOS, Windows, or Linux.

It provides threat prevention capabilities while uses connect via VPN for Windows devices.

What needs improvement?

Access is provisioned based on a single L3 tunnel being established between the endpoint and the VPN device. If an attacker gains access to this session then all of the tunnel traffic is compromised. It needs to move to next-generation style access, provisioning such as per-app VPN.

The GUI interface for configuring the SSL VPN is not user-friendly and requires expertise. 

Devices are exposed over the internet and it can lead to a security threat.

When a critical patch needs to be applied to the VPN, downtime is required for the entire NGFW. This can impact the business when it has a single security gateway.

This product cannot manage sudden user growth, as each security gateway has limitations in terms of performance and throughput.

The fully-featured security module is only supported on Windows and Mac systems, which means that organizations with Linux will face issues providing secure access. Specifically, modules such as Threat prevention, Access control, and Incident analysis are supported only on Windows and Mac.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

It's very stable in terms of downtime, although it required updates.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The solution can be easily scaled by adding a security gateway.

How are customer service and technical support?

The Check Point technical support is excellent.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We used Aventail SonicWALL as a standalone product. We switched because it was expensive in terms of management and maintenance. As we already had Check Point NGFW, it was easy to enable the VPN on the same device.

How was the initial setup?

Enabling the VPN was simple and straightforward with the purchase of an additional license from the OEM. Once we acquired the license, it involved enabling the module on the security gateway. The solution was ready to go live within 10-15 minutes.

What about the implementation team?

The implementation was completed by our in-house team with the assistance of the OEM.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

Organizations that already have the Check Point NGFW need to purchase an additional license to have access to the VPN functionality.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We evaluated Pulse and Citrix before choosing this option. 

What other advice do I have?

Traditional VPNs that work on L3 or L4, with a single VPN tunnel, are typically hosted on-premises. As organizations are adopting cloud computing, it makes sense to have a VPN solution hosted on the cloud for better control and security.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Application Integrator at a financial services firm with 1,001-5,000 employees
Real User
Top 10
Stable, scalable, easy to install, great support, and it upgrades and deploys apps easily
Pros and Cons
  • "The most interesting and powerful feature for us is the fact that we can upgrade any kind of app instantly."
  • "The downside is that Microsoft bought this product and they are going to discontinue it in 2026. This is worrisome for us."

What is our primary use case?

We are integrators. We integrate this product.

We use this solution to deploy applications to end-users in a very fast, secure manner, and in an isolated container.

What is most valuable?

The most interesting and powerful feature for us is the fact that we can upgrade any kind of app instantly.

We like that we can deploy apps, both globally or per-user.

Also, that the applications follow the user. For example, if the end-user connects to a different station and the application is published for him, the application will follow him no matter where he is.

We can run scripts on different triggers for when an application is published, unpublished, or when a package is added or removed.

It's very flexible.

What needs improvement?

The downside is that Microsoft bought this product and they are going to discontinue it in 2026. This is worrisome for us.

I would like to see them continue to maintain the product. From my point of view, it reached a maturity where we can consider it to be perfect.

If we wanted to be picky, Microsoft could improve the synchronization of the client. We were forced to put our own PowerShell script, which mimics the built-in functionality of the syncing. It would avoid errors.

Another feature that has not been implemented, but would be nice to have is the possibility to publish different shortcuts within the same package, to different groups. 

There is a solution in place, but it's not really working. If you have two different groups on two different shortcuts, everything works fine, as long as you don't have a common set of users in those groups. As soon as you have one user in both groups, then the client won't know which one to publish, and it is not able to do a merge between those two settings.

I would like the synchronization improved and to have the possibility to publish different shortcuts to different groups within the same package.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using this solution for a very long time. Since the time that it was still SoftGrid.

We are using the latest version.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

It's a stable product.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

It is very scalable. We have approximately 4,000 users.

How are customer service and technical support?

From my point of view, the interaction with Microsoft support was great. 

Actually, at one point in the past, they were delivering patches just for us. So I think they're great.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

Before Microsoft App-V, we had MSA, which is still a great product. 

The disadvantage of MSA is that it is difficult to deploy compared to App-V.

You need to perform an installation on the user's computer in a timeframe where the user is not there. 

Everything runs in the system account. You have conflicts with other apps because everything is locally installed, with MSA being the main installation engine, in MSA through SSCM. 

I believe that they are trying to put MSA X in place, which is not very good, but MSA would remain the main way to install applications.

How was the initial setup?

If the installation is on the client it is a part of the Windows 10 Operating System.

If it is on the server-side, or publication, it is straightforward. Depending on the complexity of your infrastructure, there may be some configurations to do.

In theory, for a small company, it is straightforward. You deploy the setup and that is it. For a normal infrastructure, with a publication server, management server, and reporting server, this can be done in five to six hours.

A more complex infrastructure, where you need to load balancers and multiple servers, with test and production infrastructure, it can take up to one month. This is not the installation itself, it's the normal workflow so that you make sure you don't impact end-users.

We have a team of five that includes one manager, three packagers, and one admin to deploy and maintain this solution.

What other advice do I have?

I have a lot of experience with Microsoft App-V and VMware as a normal user. I'm not managing the infrastructure, and we do a lot of publications through Citrix.

We use it on-premises and I am not aware if there is a cloud version for App-V.

This solution would be suited for big companies with many users. A normal user at home would never use this product. 

In the current context, since the end of life has already been reached and we are at the extended end of life, I wouldn't recommend adopting this solution.

With this critical exception, Microsoft App-V is a great product.

I would rate Microsoft App-V a nine out of ten.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Integrator
BHARAT B  SHARMA - PeerSpot reviewer
Director at Shreenathji Solutions
Real User
Top 5
Easy to set up and reliable, but needs an additional control panel
Pros and Cons
  • "You can scale the product."
  • "We've had issues with security breaches."

How has it helped my organization?

It's helped with cutting costs and making access easier. People can work remotely using this product. For remote billing, it's working well. 

What is most valuable?

The ability to access the computer from a remote location is great. With the Windows Server as a client, we can use more than one computer at a time.

The initial setup is simple. 

It's a stable solution.

You can scale the product.

What needs improvement?

We've had issues with security breaches. The main problem is that if we are using this with the individual computer and using a remote desktop, there are some loopholes there. When I implemented this on an individual computer within two or three days it got captured.

There is a problem with the printing and sharing of this program. There is a lot of customized software leaving the market due to this. If somebody wants to run a specific program with the specific settings, they don't want full access to the computer. Then there are some problems that have to be resolved.

We'd like to have an additional control panel available in order o more easily give resources to the computers. There are a lot of restrictions and having a program panel would make things easier. It would help us set up the right access and permissions.  

For how long have I used the solution?

We've been using the solution for 20 years. It's been a long time. 

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The solution is stable. If it is configured properly, then it'll not create any problems in between. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The scalability depends on the server size. It does not scale on a personal computer, however. 

How are customer service and support?

The solution can be configured in such a way that you are able to maintain it yourself. We've never had to reach out to technical support for assistance. 

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

For printer redirection, we are using third-party software.

We've used Citrix and VMware in the past.

How was the initial setup?

The implementation is very straightforward. If there are some problems or if clients have installation issues, that can be solved by the technician and it's very easy.

I'd rate the implementation a three out of five in terms of the ease of the process. 

It does not take too much time due to the remote desktop. You just have to do some settings on the server or computer. We only need about three people to handle deployment tasks. 

What about the implementation team?

I'm a consultant and an integrator. I never call up a third party to help with implementation. 

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

The solution is not too expensive. It's moderately priced. I'd rate it a three out of five in terms of affordability. 

What other advice do I have?

We are using this and Windows Server and Windows 10 or Windows 9, whatever is available.

Normally this is a private cloud, however, right now, a lot of our customers are on AWS and they're using it from the cloud, also.

I'd advise new users to first gather good knowledge and do some planning before the implementation. 

I'd rate the solution six out of ten.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

Public Cloud

If public cloud, private cloud, or hybrid cloud, which cloud provider do you use?

Amazon Web Services (AWS)
Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: integrator/consultant
Flag as inappropriate
Technical Lead at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Easy to use, stable, and scalable
Pros and Cons
  • "VMware Horizon Cloud is easy to use and the full development cloud is very good. The main features of VMware are included. It's a cloud-based virtual desktop infrastructure software that allows you to permit the virtual desktops and applications to any device from the single unified management control. These are managed from the dedicated remote session desktop."

    What is our primary use case?

    I'm using VMware Horizon Cloud for end-user computing solutions from the VMware Cloud and Microsoft Azure for supporting the user's level. We are publishing new images from the backend to the user support team through vSphere and this is where we are monitoring all the VDAs.

    Sometimes we will receive a CPU usage alert and we are monitoring through the vSphere client for all the Las Vegas VDA and Reno VDA. We then are supporting these alerts.

    What is most valuable?

    VMware Horizon Cloud is easy to use and the full development cloud is very good. The main features of VMware are included. It's a cloud-based virtual desktop infrastructure software that allows you to permit the virtual desktops and applications to any device from the single unified management control. These are managed from the dedicated remote session desktop.

    It is a multiple cloud deployment that provides flexibility. You can choose cloud capacity management by VMware or infrastructure management with Microsoft Azure.

    Advanced user configuration management through dynamic environment management is available. There are many self-serve options.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I have been using VMware Horizon Cloud for approximately two years.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    The solution is stable.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    We have approximately 30 people using this solution.

    The solution is easy to scale.

    We are working on the solution on a daily basis.

    How are customer service and support?

    Our technical support of VMware is good, but the main problem is it takes a lot of time. That's the main concern about if you raise support or any case from the VMware support team from the VMware portal, but the time taken is a little bit high. The support we did receive was good, they are supporting us well.

    After resolving all the issues, they will share the KPI articles through email, what are the steps which were followed to resolve the issue.

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    I have used Citrix. When comparing VMware Horizon Cloud and Citrix, the main difference is the support and the approach they take. The solutions are similar. VMware has a backend support team.

    How was the initial setup?

    The deployment can take approximately 24 to 48 hours.

    What about the implementation team?

    We have a two-person technical team that handles with support of this solution. We do not have a lot of maintenance with this solution.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    VMware Horizon Cloud is a low-cost solution. The model that they have is consumption-based. However, some features are expensive.

    What other advice do I have?

    More people are waiting to adopt a cloud-first strategy, or they are beginning a journey with a hybrid cloud. The cloud is very more important. The Horizon has stepped up to help these people.

    VMware Horizon can be delivered on-premise to a variety of public clouds, on both VMware Cloud and other platforms. As per the current status, it is good because it is a service on Microsoft Azure, on the desktop virtualization services available in Azure Market. It is good for new people to work with Azure cloud.

    I rate VMware Horizon Cloud an eight out of ten.

    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    Flag as inappropriate
    Datacenter Specialist at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
    Real User
    It is stable and easily scalable, but remote connection and load balancing should be better
    Pros and Cons
    • "It is stable and easily scalable."
    • "The remote connection, bandwidth usage, and error connection can be improved. Working with the load balancer sites should also be improved. For example, with Horizon, we can use two clients with a one megabit connection, but with Citrix, we can use four or five clients with the same bandwidth through ICA protocol. VMware must improve remote connection, connection stability, and load balancing."

    What is our primary use case?

    We use this solution for virtual desktop infrastructure and remote desktop connections on client sites with 18 clients or end-user devices.

    What is most valuable?

    It is stable and easily scalable. 

    What needs improvement?

    The remote connection, bandwidth usage, and error connection can be improved. Working with the load balancer sites should also be improved. For example, with Horizon, we can use two clients with a one megabit connection, but with Citrix, we can use four or five clients with the same bandwidth through ICA protocol. VMware must improve remote connection, connection stability, and load balancing.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I have been using this solution for five or six years. 

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    VMware is stable. We don't need to switch after installation, but for one area, the connection stability is currently lower than other solutions. We tested it, and one connection from the load balancer or the firewall needs to be improved.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    It is easily and quickly scalable and expandable. 

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    We are also Citrix Platinum partners. We are using Citrix solutions and desktop. When we create a project, we give our clients options and considerations between Citrix and VMWare. They choose after that.

    For one building or two buildings that are nearby, or one local site, we prefer Horizon Seven. If end users are connected to VDI desktops or other Citrix services or if they are using a load balancer like NetScaler, for coming from outside to the inside of corporate, we are using Citrix VDI because of the ITA protocol.

    How was the initial setup?

    The initial setup is quick and easy, but after that, you must configure user groups, machine groups, and delivery groups. It also requires some scripting and other tweaks, but the initial setup is easy for VMware Horizon.

    The deployment duration depends on the number of users. For example, for 1,000 end users, you need redundancy servers for VMWare Horizon, and you need other servers for connecting to vCenter. Load balancing depends upon the client's sites. For example, for 10 users, I can make a connection locally in 45 minutes to one hour, but for 1,000 end users from different sites, it can take two to four days. If the complexity is high, it can take one month.

    In terms of the staff required for deployment and maintenance, it depends on the end users and requirements on the customer site. I can complete installation myself, for example, of up to 100 users on one site. If more sites and more configurations are needs, it is a team job. It depends on the end users and customer expectations.

    What other advice do I have?

    I would rate VMware Horizon 7 a seven out of ten. If it becomes stronger like the Citrix ICA protocol, it would easily be a ten.

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    On-premises
    Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: partner
    Buyer's Guide
    Application Virtualization
    July 2022
    Get our free report covering VMware, Citrix, Microsoft, and other competitors of Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops. Updated: July 2022.
    619,967 professionals have used our research since 2012.