XenApp or XenDesktop?

A reoccurring challenge I experience is clients selecting the best application/desktop delivery method to suit their business and technological needs.  My engagements are roughly split 50/50 between XenApp and XenDesktop, though only a handful of my XenDesktop clients truly needed XenDesktop.  The rest could have made due with XenApp only.

What’s the Difference?

Before continuing I want to make sure we’re all on the same page as to the primary differences between XenApp and XenDesktop.  XenApp is primary utilized to deliver hosted applications to users.  XenApp is Windows Server based only, so it will primarily be installed on Windows Server 2003, Windows Server 2008, or Windows Server 2008 R2.  XenApp is a shared solution meaning a single XenApp server is utilized to provide access to hosted applications for multiple users.  All of these users share the same physical resources (CPU, RAM, etc.).  XenApp does have the ability to deliver a desktop to users.  However, this will be a shared desktop and will be a Windows Server desktop rather than Windows XP, Vista, or 7.  There are configuration options to make the desktop appear more like a Windows Desktop OS, though it is still a Windows Server OS in the background subject to all the same concerns of application compatibility and vendor support.

XenDesktop is used to deliver a Windows Desktop (XP, Vista, or 7).  The key differences between the desktop delivered via XenApp and XenDesktop is that the XenDesktop desktop is a true Windows XP, Vista, or 7 Desktop, and the desktop instance is not shared between users.  This means every user receives their own instance of Windows; basically their own little sandbox.

The Choice

The choice of whether to use XenApp or XenDesktop involves a multitude of factors, all of which need to be thoroughly investigated to reach the best decision.  Some of the key decision points are reviewed below.

Application or OS Compatibility

Perhaps the oldest challenge associated with XenApp is application or OS compatibility.  Most applications are developed to function in a Desktop OS rather than a Server OS.  Typical challenges include applications not being multi-user aware, hard coding paths, and 16 bit applications.  Some of these challenges can be worked around by modifying the installation package or introducing application streaming, though 100% application compatibility is a myth.

This is typically a good scenario for XenDesktop.  XenDesktop delivers a true Windows Desktop that is not multi-user.  It is true that some application compatibility concerns could remain, such as installing a 16 bit application in a Windows 7 64 bit Desktop, though these concerns are greatly reduced with XenDesktop.

Vendor Support

One of the first subjects I broach with clients is the applications they intend to utilize.  If a client tells me they want to use XenApp 6, which is Windows 2008 R2 only, I ask if their application vendors will support them on a 64 bit Windows 2008 environment.  The usual reply is that the client has tested the applications and found they work.

Whether or not the application works isn’t the question.  The question is will the application vendor support the environment.  If an application vendor won’t support the environment then it isn’t an option.  In truth this depends upon the importance of the application.  If the application is rarely used or isn’t business critical then perhaps you proceed, though if the application in question is business critical then you should not put yourself in the position of losing vendor support.

Resource Intensive

Some applications, while perhaps functional in a Windows Server OS, are far too resource intensive to host in a XenApp environment.  This is a situation in which XenDesktop can offer two broad options:

  1. Host the application in a standard virtualized Windows Desktop OS backed by a bit more horsepower.
  2. Host the application in a blade PC environment, which will allow access to more resources than a virtualized OS.

Local Workstations (Do you need them?)

There are circumstances in which users may not require access to a full hosted desktop.  This is usually the case if the user primarily works through a thick client or if the user works in a call center environment in which they require access to a limited number of applications.  In this case it is better to deliver those applications via XenApp rather than deliver a full desktop.

User Density

The greatest selling point of XenApp over XenDesktop is user density per server, which directly impacts cost.  Let’s use a server with 8 CPU cores and 146 GB RAM as an example.  We’ll assume a virtual environment to allow virtualized instances of Windows 7 or Windows Server.  The exact hypervisor doesn’t really matter.  With XenDesktop I will likely achieve 80 – 160 desktops, depending upon how many VMs I can achieve per core (usually 10-20).  Sometimes the number will be less and other times it will be higher depending upon the application load.

With that same hardware I can likely easily install seven virtual instances (perhaps more depending upon software utilized) of XenApp.  The user density will depend upon a 32 bit or 64 bit OS, though we should be able to achieve anywhere from 210 – 420 users on that same hypervisor.

This quick example shows that a typical XenDesktop environment will require more hardware than a XenApp environment.

Conclusion

I’m frequently asked what the better solution is: XenApp and XenDesktop.   My answer is always the same.  Both technologies are great.  There really isn’t a right or wrong answer.  In the end it’s about delivering the tool that best fits the technical and business needs of the environment.

20 Comments

  • [...] Read More   [...]

  • John Costa says:

    Brilliant document. Thanks.

  • David says:

    Excellent. Explained everything very clearly. I had gotten lost in the sales spiel of the Citrix website. You cleared it up for me.

  • Thank you a bunch for sharing this with all folks you really know what you are speaking approximately! Bookmarked. Kindly also visit my website =). We can have a hyperlink change agreement between us!

  • Charlie Wang says:

    Excellent document. Very helpful!

  • YVETTE says:

    Excellent goods from you, man. I have keep in mind your stuff previous to and you are simply too excellent. I really like what you’ve got right here, certainly like what you are stating and the way wherein you assert it. You’re making it entertaining and you still take care of to keep it smart. I can not wait to read far more from you. This is really a wonderful web site.

  • Thank you for another informative web site. Where else could I am getting that kind of information written in such an ideal approach? I’ve a challenge that I’m just now running on, and I have been at the glance out for such information.

  • Hassan says:

    Excellent Notes. I am new to Citrix tech & found the above topic extremely useful. Tks a lot

  • Sham says:

    Awsome stuff Michael. You made the technology so simple to understand. Keep up the great work.

  • Mad Scientist says:

    The gap between XenApp and XenDesktop is closing and closing. I suspect that XenApp (or a similar technology) will most likely win. VDI (ex: XenDesktop) is just a stepping stone to something better that looks a lot more than XenApp than XenDesktop. Future versions of Windows Server will provide compatibility options to run applications in an instance treated as a desktop OS. This is already being worked on my Microsoft. Meaning the application instance itself is virtualized to run as if it were on a desktop OS. This technology is the future of virtualization and will make approaches like XenDesktop obsolete at that point. Time frame is 2016 – 2017.

  • VJ says:

    Hi, I?ve been a lurker around your blog for a few months. I love this article and your entire site! Looking forward to reading more!
    I am impressed by the quality of information on this website.

  • Hi! I simply would like to offer you a big thumbs up for the excellent
    information you have here on this post. I’ll be coming back to your web site for more
    soon.

  • Have you ever considered about including a
    little bit more than just your articles? I mean, what you
    say is valuable and everything.But just imagine if you added some great visuals or video clips to give your posts more, “pop”!
    Your content is excellent but with images and videos, this
    blog could definitely be one of the greatest in its niche.
    Great blog!

  • L.Hayward says:

    Michael, your use of “make due” is in error. http://grammarist.com/usage/make-do-make-due/

  • amit says:

    Thanks for all details mention above. Now all cleared in my mind. Still one doubt in my mind regarding Licences. if I want to go with Xendesktop with 300 users which and how many licences required. Pls. tell me uregent.

  • Salman says:

    I am heading to a meeting next week and this article gives me the necessary background for further reading.

  • Although most guides will inform you strategies of choosing up girls
    and they say that you are not ready to be successful all
    the time but when you invite ten girls you may possibly succeed with two or 3.
    Most of the time the client is not aware of these habits, and it requires some real
    work on my part just to convince them that they exist in the first place.

    It will take witrhin guidelines in order to strategy women they fancy in a manner that make them
    adequate to them.

  • Pruning should be done the opposite direction when mowing has been done before.
    Some additional considerations that will affect your business are the weather and the climate you are in.
    A few years ago I had a lawn that I couldn’t keep healthy throughout the summer.

  • Bianca says:

    If a user has experience with XenApp would they most likely be able to utilize XenDT?

  • Rick says:

    I like the simple explanation of the difference between the two modules – something I have hunted for on Citrix own site for hours without finding.

    I would note, however, that we have used the different versions of Citrix over the last 10 years and have never come close to achieving the numbers listed under the User Density section. Certainly not with the kind of speed and responsiveness that users demand.

Leave a Reply

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>