Microsoft Azure Application Gateway vs NetScaler comparison

"It does an excellent job of load balancing."

"The production is a valuable feature."

"The simplicity of the solution and its ability to integrate easily with others are its most valuable aspects."

"Azure Application Gateway's most valuable feature is ease of use. The configuration is straightforward. It isn't difficult to adjust the size of your instances in the settings. You can do that with a few clicks, and the configuration file is the same way. You can also set rules and policies with minimal time and effort."

"Microsoft Azure Application Gateway gives us a lot of benefits, including domain mapping."

"The pricing is quite good."

"WAF feature replicates the firewall."

"I like the tool's stability and performance."

"I like the ease of use. It's easy to manage. I also like it's ease of use with virtualization technologies with applications."

"The load balancing feature of this solution is very good."

"Its customer support service is good."

"Citrix is good for application protection."

"Citrix Director has been great. It gives us one pane of glass to be able to monitor what's going on with the user sessions as well as to keep on top of the virtual desktops, any servers that may be offline or behaving suspiciously, or any troublesome spots like disconnections. We also use Citrix Studio for maintaining the actual servers that are hosting these applications. We use it for delivery groups in case we need to modify delivery groups in regards to which groups have access to which applications. It has been very helpful."

"The most valuable feature is the SSL VPN."

"The most valuable feature is load balancing."

"Enables a Web service that offers persistent client-server connections, IP restriction, URL rewrite (such as remove "/assets/" path from client-side URL path), and cache for CSS or JS files... You can easily use the GUI to set up all these requirements on the same network device within 20-30 minutes. (If you do the same steps on CLI, it might take less time.)"

"It does not have the flexibility for using public IPs in version 2."

"I want the solution's support to improve. The tool is also expensive."

"The support provided for the solution has certain shortcomings that need improvement, especially when it comes to the response time from the support team."

"It is a bit tricky to configure. You've got to have a very specific format to configure it. They should make it a little bit easier to configure. Mapping the certificates into it isn't easy, and it could be better. Currently, you've to write a bit of automation to pull certificates directly to HTTPS."

"We faced some downtime while validating CNAME."

"Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is not scalable."

"There is room for improvement in the pricing model."

"Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is harder to manage than Imperva. It is not intuitive and stable compared to other products."

"Citrix ADC can be really complex. It isn't very simple like some other appliances that I've worked with. You need a lot of skill and experience to manage it. I'm not talking about a year or two. You need at least four years to understand it very well. It is not that easy to learn. They should make it a lot simpler for users to understand the management of it. They can also provide some additional training. The material they have on the site is not sufficient enough for you to understand how to manage it. Their training is expensive, and not everyone has the funds and experience for it. Citrix isn't very popular around these parts of the world. So, it can use some more marketing, sales, enlightenment, and advertisement. These could bring more market for them. Basically, there are just a few companies that really go for Citrix. Most of the companies go for VMware because they marketed themselves more than Citrix. There isn't much difference between Citrix and VMware. VMware is a little more robust than Citrix. Citrix has focused more on desktops rather than server virtualization, and that's the advantage VMware has over Citrix. Citrix also needs to educate and inform users about the infrastructure that is supported with a version. Currently, if the customers don't look at the datasheet, they might miss this important information."

"We would like the licensing model for this product to be improved, as it isn't currently very transparent. There isn't a standard package available, and each extra feature creates an additional cost."

"The product provides some templates to integrate with applications like MS Exchange, MS SharePoint, SAP Enterprise Portal, and others. However, the last update for these templates was 2013 (lots of applications are running on versions newer then 2013)."

"Security could be improved because then I can get rid of my Cisco firewalls. If they improve the security then I could run my security, my proxy, my firewalling and my SDN solution on one device instead of having to have multiple devices."

"Overall the price of Citrix ADC could be more competitive."

"Citrix is more expensive than Horizon."

"I would like to enhance the solution's bot protection features."

"Their upgrades are not very backward compatible, and sometimes they mess up."

"It is an expensive solution. We have an enterprise agreement, it is monthly."

"We use the tool's basic subscription. Its licensing costs are monthly."

"The pricing is based on how much you use the solution."

"The solution's pricing is not complex. It is not expensive from our point of view."

"There is a need to pay a fixed price per month to use the product. There are no additional payments to be made to Microsoft apart from the charges paid towards the monthly licensing costs attached to the solution."

"The solution is reasonably priced compared to other solutions."

"There is some additional cost, such as extended support."

"Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is a pretty affordable product. My company needs to make yearly payments towards the licensing costs of the solution. The additional costs apart from the licensing costs of the solution vary."

"Licensing is adequate. I wanted to have a more prominent license, but until I do they don't give enough support. The additional cost would be too much."

"I rate the tool's pricing an eight out of ten."

"We have been evaluating F5, Citrix, and other ADC products. Citrix is the most expense of all of them."

"The pricing for Citrix Web App and API Protection is unreasonable. I don't know the exact price, but I heard it's tens of thousands and it's a bit too much for the small country I live in."

"On a scale from one to ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive, I rate the solution's pricing an eight or nine out of ten."

"We get value for money. Its price is fair. I don't think it is overpriced."

"For the specific use case that my customers primarily engage with, I would give the pricing a rating of seven out of ten."

"Our licensing fees including technical support are approximately $3,500 USD."