We performed a comparison between Loadbalancer.org and Radware Alteon based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Loadbalancer is easy to use. It performs well, with low latency."
"It does what it’s supposed to do which is balancing an important intranet site we are using, so if one server dies, the second becomes active straight away."
"The performance is good."
"Load balancing helps us distribute both incoming and outgoing data loads evenly among the servers, preventing overload on a single server."
"It helps us to route the traffic to the available servers. If we didn't have Loadbalancer we would fail to set the end-user and it would cause a failure in the cluster."
"The user interface precludes need to be well versed with Linux IPVS command line. This make it easy for junior team members to participate in managing load balancing needs."
"I found scalability in Loadbalancer.org valuable."
"Loadbalancer.org is less complex than Citrix."
"I am finding SSL-TLS acceleration the most valuable function, with certificate management. It is easy to generate certificates and assign them to services"
"The best features are the security through the web application firewall, the functionality that the solution offers, being a load balancer with the security functionality on top of it, and the ease of administration."
"It saves us a lot of work in terms of management since it has tasks already defined automatically. That enables us to better administer our services. It is very dynamic and easy to administer."
"It is easy to expand. Our clients are enterprise-size."
"The solution has been very stable."
"The most valuable aspect is that it establishes user security."
"The most valuable features of Radware Alteon are the reverse proxy functionality and the SSL offload and hardware."
"The health status information, with its highly detailed reporting, has saved us time on troubleshooting. We have the precise information needed that helps us find different types of situations."
"The configuration is somewhat complicated. Someone who does not know the solution may find this challenging."
"I'd like to see scalability improved; it can be costly."
"They're mostly designed to balance a particular type of traffic. I wanted to load balance DNS, and they just don't do it the way that we wanted to. So they're not used as DNS load balancers."
"The configuration is somewhat complicated. Someone who does not know the solution may find this challenging."
"Compared to the physical products, the solution's throughput is a little less."
"I would like it if Loadbalancer had the ability to make rules for specific shared bots."
"I would like a notification when a new version of the software is available. They told me to sign up for their newsletter, but I have not received any notification for a newer software version."
"It doesn't have the bonding capability feature."
"We recently had a problem with the tables Obsolete ARP which was observed by the support team. It would be good to diagnose and solve this problem with a patch since it is not documented that it will be solved in later updates."
"The reverse proxy piece is a little bit complicated. If the reverse proxy were easier to implement, that would help."
"I would like the solution to display and help visualize the reference map more easily. I would also like to better understand where queries come from and know which users are consulting the application, along with which app."
"I would like this solution to have an integration tool that will convert configuration from other software, into readable values for this product during implementation."
"The interface implementation can be improved."
"The community portal does not have a place to find scripts."
"Load balancing needs improvement. It needs better integration. I heard f5 works as a DNS operator which is not available in this solution. It would be better if that was implemented."
"We are having a difficult time with the security module, and how to implement the Radware security."
Loadbalancer.org is ranked 10th in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 22 reviews while Radware Alteon is ranked 7th in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 33 reviews. Loadbalancer.org is rated 8.8, while Radware Alteon is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Loadbalancer.org writes "Great WAF - low-maintenance solution that performs as advertised ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Radware Alteon writes "It's a good fit for a small team because the maintenance is easier and you don't need to know how to code". Loadbalancer.org is most compared with Citrix NetScaler, HAProxy, Fortinet FortiADC and F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM), whereas Radware Alteon is most compared with F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM), Citrix NetScaler, HAProxy, A10 Networks Thunder ADC and F5 Advanced WAF. See our Loadbalancer.org vs. Radware Alteon report.
See our list of best Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) vendors.
We monitor all Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) 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.