Application streaming vs VDI.
How to choose.
Both approaches keep Windows software on a server and put the display in front of the user. The difference is the unit you deliver: a whole desktop for VDI, a single application for streaming. That choice shapes cost, management effort and the user experience.
The unit of delivery
VDI hands each user a managed desktop, with its image, patching and profile. Application streaming launches only the app a person asked for, in its own session, and shows just that window.
For someone who opens one ERP client all day, a full desktop is more than the job asks for. For a power user living in many tools at once, a desktop is the natural fit.
Side by side
These are the differences that tend to matter in practice.
- Setup per user: streaming needs access to a catalog; VDI needs a desktop provisioned.
- Client on the device: streaming runs in a browser tab; VDI usually uses a remote-desktop client.
- Management: streaming manages apps and policy; VDI manages images and desktops as well.
- Isolation: Onscryn gives each session its own Windows user on a shared host, which is a different model from a virtual machine per user.
- Scope: streaming suits per-app access; VDI suits whole-desktop workflows.
Cost and licensing
Streaming tends to need less per-user infrastructure because you are not holding a full desktop open for everyone. But hosting Windows for users still carries licensing obligations, and those depend on your Microsoft agreements. Anyone who tells you the licensing simply goes away is oversimplifying.
Security and control
In both models the data stays on the server. What differs is how easily you can see and control it. With streaming, clipboard and file transfer can be blocked per app or per organization at the broker, a watermark can be burned into the stream, and sessions can be recorded.
Choosing
Start from what people actually open. If it is a short list of applications, stream them. Keep full desktops for the people who need one, or use a full-desktop mode from the same platform. Then prove it on your own apps before you commit.
What each one does to the help desk
Local installs and remote-desktop clients generate a steady stream of small problems: wrong version, missing runtime, a client that will not connect. Moving the app to a host takes the device out of the equation, which removes a whole class of tickets.
VDI removes many of them too, but keeps others: desktop images to maintain, profiles that grow, and users who need to be told how to connect. Streaming trades some of that for a smaller thing to run.
User experience
In VDI a person lands on a desktop and opens things from there. With streaming they open the application directly, and the rest of Windows is out of sight. For people who only ever use one tool, that is simpler. For people who juggle many tools and files, a desktop is a more natural home.
Isolation and the security model
A virtual machine per user is a strong boundary, and it comes at a cost per user. Streaming on a shared host gives each session its own Windows account and, by default, removes the account and its profile when the session ends. With warm pooling, accounts are reused only after the profile is scrubbed.
These are different models, and which one is right depends on your risk appetite and your auditors. They are worth discussing openly rather than hiding behind a label.
A sensible migration path
You do not have to switch everyone at once. A common approach is to pick the application with the most pain, stream it to a pilot group, and compare support effort and satisfaction with what you have today. If that goes well, move the next application.
| Application streaming | VDI | |
|---|---|---|
| What the user gets | The application they asked for | A full managed desktop |
| On the user's device | A browser tab | Usually a remote-desktop client |
| What you manage | Apps, access and policy | Desktop images, patching, profiles, access and policy |
| Best for | People who use a few specific apps | People who work across a whole desktop |
| Isolation model in Onscryn | A Windows account per session on a shared host | Typically a virtual machine per user |
| Licensing | Windows and app licensing still apply | Windows and app licensing still apply |
Illustration
A worked example
Imagine a company with two hundred people. Forty use a full desktop all day, and the rest only open one finance tool and a document system a few times a week.
Giving the forty a desktop, and streaming the two applications to the other hundred and sixty, means the desktop estate is a fifth of the size it would have been. Each group gets what the work needs, and nobody is stuck with a desktop they do not use.
Decide with these questions
- How many people need a full desktop, and how many only need one or two applications?
- How much effort goes into maintaining images and profiles today?
- What does each approach cost per user once Windows and application licensing are counted?
- Do your auditors need a virtual machine per user, or is a separate Windows account per session acceptable?
- How important is launch speed, and would a pool of ready sessions help?
- Can you run a pilot on one application and measure it?
Related features
Questions.
Yes. Per-app streaming for most people, and a full desktop for those who need it. A full-desktop mode is available, depending on your plan.