AppsAnywhere vs. Azure Virtual Desktop

AppsAnywhere is basically suitable for its purpose, despite some usability problems. In our place, applications can in principle be delivered to other machines (not owned by us but by the end-user), who are not even on-site - provided the user can connect to our domain, almost any kind of device is ok. However, I have not tried that myself. The UI could let people work faster, but only by a little, and most people get there in the end. It is basically quite simple to use and appealing to look at

Incentivized

Currently Azure Virtual Desktop enviroments are our first choice for all customers. Especially because most of our customers already have a M365 License which includes Azure Virtual Desktop usage. We deploy it for both RemoteApp and Full desktop solutions. This gives us the flexibility to "lift and shift" a specific workload of more legacy customers towards the cloud and provide them with a secure solution to use their apps in the cloud from anywhere.

Incentivized

• you can use AppsAnywhere to open and launch windows application on operating system through AppsAnywhere web page.
• AppsAnywhere system is compatible with my all devices and operating system work perfectly.
• You need persistent internet connection to used this software from anywhere.

Incentivized

• You can publish as many host pools as you need to accommodate your diverse workloads
• Brings your own image for production workloads or test from the Azure Gallery
• Reduces costs with pooled, multi-session resources.
• With the new Windows 10 Enterprise multi-session capability exclusive to Windows Virtual Desktop and Remote Desktop Session Host (RDSH) role on Windows Server, you can greatly reduce the number of virtual machines and operating system (OS) overhead while still providing the same resources to your users.

Incentivized

• The search function could be more intuitive.
• I feel like there could be more options for customizing the look and feel of the app.

Incentivized

• Troubleshooting bit limited as it's running on MS cloud. You don't have that level of access to get the logs data.
• App or ISO update management also complex compare to user management. It also hard to predict cost when you have inflex of usage. not really straightforward to tell which group/users are using most of the resources.
• as I mention earlier, troubleshooting is limited. When you have peak hour usage, user may see some performance issues.

Incentivized

Almost everyone you tell to use it to access a specialist application can find the software they need and install it. However, surprisingly many have difficulties finding AppsAnywhere under the start menu or on the task bar - it is not a icon or name they recognise, and they really want to lunch the target specialist software (Zbrush or whatever). Once you find it, many people ignore the search function which is probably the fastest method, and browse the long list alphabetically, because the standard filters do not help much. Favouriting is rarely used as it is too burdensome and not an issue for users when they are looking for the applicationt hey need.

Incentivized

Stability and latency complaints are common, but not experienced by all users. A drop in overall productivity can be seen in contributors who rely on a lot of copy-pasting for editing, so some such commands are not instantaneous. Set up is intuitive and the tool is simple enough. It was quick to adopt and stick to.

Incentivized

I recently had the opportunity to compare AppsAnywhere with Oracle VM, Amazon Workspaces, and Kasm Workspaces. I found that AppsAnywhere was the most intuitive and easiest to use out of the four, and it also had the best customer support. Its powerful cloud-based technology made it easy to access applications from any device without having to worry about compatibility issues. The user experience was also great and I found that I could easily customize my workspace according to my needs.

Incentivized

Licensing is much more cost effective as our users are not regularly using remote access. Having to purchase user cal's "just in case" was expensive. Citrix over the last few years has become more difficult with licensing and support. We were glad to move away. As our users use Azure Virtual Desktop as a fallback, it proved to be a much more cost effective solution, and FSLogix and W11 provide a better end user experience.

Incentivized

• It has increase new courses usage by 40%
• The engagement of the user is increasing 15%
• increase of user by 10%

Incentivized

• Though this virtual desktop had its cost but it is better in the longer run as we dont need to upgrade our not much older machines
• Only concern is we need to make sure that we provide better internet connection at all time
• The productivity has gone up multifold since previously we used to struggle with our older machines capacity to process data

Incentivized