NetScaler Reviews

There have been several uses, but mostly in a data center where security is required and where they can utilize a lot of load-balancing services.

As an architect, I have deployed it in so many areas. Some like to use the SSL portion of it, others, they use the load-balancing. It does a lot more than what people use it for. The one feature that works really well is the SSL VPN. It's very easy to set up and you can go very granular with it. You can define what user groups get what kind of access and the management overhead is very low.

The customization has always been a key area where some improvements are required. In the beginning, everything was for customizing the outer shell of it. You had to use the command-based utility and you had to do a lot of manual work. They have improved it a little bit and now there are some GUI-based functionalities that can be used. However, more can be done that doesn't require a lot of intervention. Right now there are some features, there are some customizations that can be done, but it's still very tedious, very cumbersome, a lot of work. So that could be simplified.

There is one other thing that I would like to address. In every release - and it doesn't matter if it's a minor release or a major release - they keep moving things around and they keep changing the mechanism. So certain things can work in one version one way, and everything works really well, then when you upgrade it to the next version, it breaks everything because they have a new way of doing it. I don't know what can be done in that regard. I have seen it many times: A solution is working fine and then, all of a sudden, you upgrade and bam, now you have to redo everything a different way.

In addition, if they could make the following improvement they would push out more NetScaler. The industry needs to know, or people need to know that NetScaler is not designed just for Citrix products like XenApp and XenDesktop, it can be utilized for everything.

Other than that, the core of the product, or the engine, fits really well. It works well, it's doing really well so I don't see any improvements that are required there.

In connection with what I mentioned in the "Room For Improvement" section, you can go ahead and create some VPN policies that may work really well, just the way you want. For example in version 10.1, the solutions were working just fine. As soon as you upgraded to 11, those solutions were no longer working. You had to go back and redo everything and change the priorities and such.

As long as you choose the right model for a certain use case, you're good to go.

Surprisingly, tech support for NetScaler has been amazing. I have always been able to find, say 95 percent of the time, really good engineers and have been able to get good support. In that regard, there has been much improvement.

In the past, two years back and before that, the support was really not great. Every now and then you would run into some good engineer but the rest of them were pretty basic. They would waste your time. For about a year, a year and a half now, I have been getting really good support.

It's not that I have used other solutions, it's just that in most environments where I have had to do my job or to come up with solutions as a solutions architect, the preferred technology was NetScaler; if not, I would suggest they use it.

However, if they had anything else, for example, F5 or A10 - if that was their preferred method - I have used those as well. So it's not up to me. But for a new customer, for a new build, my suggestion has been to go with NetScaler even if they didn't have Citrix.

The biggest misconception in the industry is that you need NetScaler if you have Citrix in your environment. And if you have any other solution, let's says VMware Horizon View, you want to use something else. But they don't realize you can use NetScaler regardless of whether you have Citrix or not.

It's not that I have switched, I have always used many different technologies, but this happens to be one of my favorites and it's one of the technologies I've been working with for a long time.

It is complex technology and it has always been that way. You really have to know NetScaler well in order for you to capitalize on it. Even though they have given you installation wizards to make things easy, it is still like a hybrid of network and systems all in one package. So you have to know a lot about networking and a lot about systems. In my case, I have been installing this for a long time so for me, it's really not that big of a deal. But for new users, even when they come back after training or even if I have trained them, it takes them a long time before they can get comfortable with it because, as I said earlier, it's a beast of a technology, it has so much in it.

It is true that it is a bit pricey compared to newer technologies coming to the market. For example, A10 is a load balancer that does everything that Citrix can and it does a lot more than what NetScaler does when it comes to the security space, and their prices are so cheap. Every box comes with its own license and support built into it.

When you compare that with NetScaler, you have to buy licenses separately, you have to buy a support agreement that is going to be separate. A small NetScaler, even if it is a VPX which is a virtual server, could cost you close to $150,000 to $200,000 dollars. So the pricing is really high.

The pricing has to come down. They usually have three-year or five-year subscriptions. I sold one to a hospital and the model that they went with cost them $500,000. That's ridiculous. It doesn't have to be so expensive because then a lot of people shy away from buying it. Their budgets are not that huge and so they have to look for financing options. A10 comes with the licenses. I don't know if they can come up with a model that every NetScaler comes with its license. Maybe, depending on however many users people want to put on it, they can have a different type of license and it can be cheaper.

As a solutions architect, when I go to a customer and they tell me: these are the things that we want to do and this is the budget we have, depending upon their budget, I have to choose what is available and what they can afford. In some cases, if they can not afford NetScaler, I have to choose another load balancer for them.

There are SSL offloading options, you have your URL redirects, VPN, SSL VPN. These are the four major options. A lot of people use web traffic so the rewrite and such, those are all part of their web filtering or enhancement.

Every product keeps improving every day and every year. The reason this has been a big technology piece in most data centers is because of the uniqueness of what it does. It's a beast of a technology but most companies, most organizations, they only use maybe 10 percent of it. But it's very popular and it's getting even more popular now that Cisco has started using this product in their UCS.

It's a very heavy-duty product, so if you have a lot of utilization, or if you can use at least half of it, then it's worth buying. It's a very robust and solid product but it really depends upon what the use case is and, of course, the budget.

Once you set it up correctly you never have to go back to change anything ever again. It works as it's supposed to and it's very dependable.

We use it for load balancing, creating a gateway to the Internet, and establishing a remote VPN connection.

One of its most valuable features is fundamental load balancing, supporting both basic load balancing and database teams.

The stability is good but should be enhanced. Each time a vulnerability is identified or a new release with applicable security fixes is issued, we find ourselves obligated to perform firmware upgrades as part of the remediation process. There is room for improvement in the technical support aspect. Currently, the support team's responsiveness is lacking, and the technical personnel on calls often seem unfamiliar with the issues or inadequately trained.

We have been working with it for the last five years.

I would rate its stability capabilities nine out of ten.

It is very scalable. I would rate it nine out of ten. In the production environment, all users accessing the application have their traffic routed through the load balancer.

The support service would benefit from being more prompt and having a higher level of technical expertise.

Previously, I used physical devices for application-related control.

The initial setup was straightforward.

The overall deployment typically takes around one week. During the process, we replicate the existing configuration onto the NetScaler. We set up a virtual load balancing gateway, operating in one-arm mode, connected to a switch. In this setup, incoming requests reach the switch, which then directs them to the load balancer. The load balancer performs the necessary load balancing and forwards the requests to the switch. From there, based on the layer to condition, the switch routes the requests to the appropriate node.

Its value lies in the fact that we have observed these devices to be highly stable. There have been minimal to no new issues identified in the devices.

The firewall license is included by default, with no additional costs.

It is suitable for scenarios with minimal production traffic. However, in high-traffic situations, it is advisable to explore alternative solutions such as Wi-Fi or other options. Overall, I would rate it nine out of ten.

From a NetScaler perspective, in terms of LTM, not GSLB, NetScasler has performed very well. In comparison to F5, it holds its own.

For some of my deployments, NetScaler has been strictly a replacement to get something new in. It was cheaper than F5. We took a chance on it. The return on investment is the fact that we spent less money on it. It does do its job and it holds well against F5.

I can turn on features without actually owning a license. I can test them out, I can use them for a while, and then I can be licensed up. That's awesome. I don't have to have a license immediately before I can start to deploy things rapidly, rapid deployment is a plus.

When I compare it to F5 from a hardware or software perspective, they both have their glitches. From a software perspective, either one is not without code bugs.

From an SDX perspective, having the ability to spin up a VPX, the way we spin up our regular features, quickly and have a 60-day trial while we spin up VPXs will give us the opportunity to do more proof of concept work quickly without having to buy the license and download the VPX. A feature like this would be helpful. 

I would also like to have video tutorials so that when you click the help link, you have the option to go to the Citrix forum and get information and help from other people and other users. Something that points you out to a tutorial video link that is a general overview. 

I liked the fact that is NetScaler out-of-the-box is intuitive. You can catch on fairly quickly. Especially when you're doing an advanced alert. You cannot do a re-direct quickly without going through some documentation and if nobody's done it before, they don't know what you're talking about. That is when a help link would be useful that could direct you to the right tutorial video and then it could point you directly after that video to further direction and explanation. Straight to the meat of things. Something like a quick video tip tutorial would be great. Whereas if you're an F5 customer, you don't get something like this and you do have DevCentral that you can go to get information, but it requires you to read through many documents and comb through trying to configure something that is complex. They should deliver the information quickly to end users to make it even faster and more efficient to deliver our own applications and services to customers.

Video files can be large, they don't necessarily have to be on the box itself, but even through a link that quickly goes to their website or YouTube, whatever platform, could work. 

I would like to see them make it easier to do some of the more complex things. For example, a web re-direct requires two pieces to it. You have two ports and when people want to go to a web page, they just type in the webpage that on the backend will redirect them to a secure link. The initial setup of that is cumbersome because you have to do it twice. There are things that can be replicated. The IP address, for example, is the same. This change would go a long way. Don't make me do it twice and don't make me have to read tons of documentation to figure out how to do it. Ease of configuration for some of the more complex processes would be a good improvement. 

It has high stability. I deployed these in hospitals where lives matter. The contention was whether or not to go with F5 because it's the leader in the marketplace and they have 70% of the market shares. Even though NetScaler is big, it still doesn't hold the fair market share. NetScaler is the underdog but it is very stable. I've seen it in hospital environments where lives matter, it's held its own, it does what it says it's going to do and it does it well. It's certainly a top contender, if not an equal contender with its counterpart, F5. 

Scalability is very impressive. The way it works is that you can collapse everything on to a couple of platforms, small, medium, and large. The small one is obviously an initial buy-in. The mid one is fairly powerful and is bigger than an 8920. You are limited on the hardware. You get 64 and you get 32 out of the box, which is what you paid for but you can license up the 64. On the other platform, you can start off at 32 with the initial buy-in and then license up from there for a max of around 256 gig. The way they have it is that you are locked in from a hardware perspective.

Their technical support is decent. It could use some improvement. Help desks and technical support are good but you can tell that there's been turnover. We'll have complex issues that we're trying to work through and we would like somebody who's more experienced and not somebody who had just gone through training. Employee retention on the help desk would go a long way. 

NetScaler does the same thing as an F5 and it's cheaper.

There was some trepidation regarding the initial setup because it's new equipment and nobody has had training for it. We were able to figure it out and stand it up. It took some reading and some calls to tech support, but they were helpful when we were first setting it up.

There are the regular license costs and you also have to pay for licenses if you want more DPXs or whatever. A standard DPX is fairly cheap. It's around $7,000. 

I would rate it an eight out of ten because nobody is a ten. I would give it a nine if it was a little easier to pick up. Out of the box it's easy. Anybody who's an engineer can usually pick it up or if they've had previous load balancing experience, it's easy. Obviously, not everybody has that kind of experience. 

Citrix Web App serves as a valuable solution for enhancing security in IT, particularly within API environments. This aspect is crucial for ensuring security.

I prefer this solution because of its user-friendly interface. I find it simple and close to what I am currently using, which is Citrix Fortiva Access for Multi-Factor Authentication. I appreciate the familiar user interface and troubleshooting tools it offers.

I am not an expert in this solution, but simplicity and user-friendly interfaces are crucial for me. I would appreciate advice from Citrix, particularly in the form of an interactive guide for API protection. It would be helpful if they could provide specific points and recommendations for cybersecurity, indicating areas that need attention or improvement. I find such interactive guidance valuable.

I have been using Citrix Web App for the past five years. 

I would rate it 9 out of 10.

I would rate the scalability 8 out of 10. 

I have interacted with them only once and they respond well.

Positive

I am familiar with Citrix, and I acknowledge that it is a good solution. Generally, our customers also prefer it. While I recognize other options as a good solution, personally, I have a preference for Citrix. It is easier for me to work with Citrix, and this preference is based on my experience.

I did not encounter any difficulties during the installation process. I don't recall the exact duration, but it might have taken around two hours in total.

There are ten individuals in our team in Turkey, including engineers and specialists.

In Turkey, everything is good, but it seems expensive for us due to the currency exchange. I don't have a specific rating scale, but if I had to rate the price, I would say it's around a six out of ten.

I would recommend it for other users and rate it 8 out of 10. 

Our organization uses Citrix NetScaler for application load balancing, global server load balancing, and web application firewall. We also use its gateway feature for remote connectivity.

The web application firewall is one feature I found valuable in the solution.

I feel that Citrix NetScaler's customer support needs to improve. Basically, I want the customer support team to be more customer friendly.

I have been using Citrix NetScaler for more than ten years. Presently. I am using the latest version of the solution.

Citrix NetScaler is amazing when it comes to the stability it provides to its users. So, if we just configure the solution and leave it as it is, it can run for years without needing maintenance work. We never got into any trouble with the solution. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten.

It is a scalable solution. Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten. In our organization, more than 1000 people are using the solution. Since most of the services are already delivered by Citrix ADC, the solution is being used 24/7 by the people in our organization.

Previously, we had contacted the solution's technical support team a couple of times. The technical support team was responsive and willing to help us whenever we contacted them. I rate the solution's technical support team a seven out of ten.

Neutral

The solution's initial setup process was straightforward. The solution's deployment process probably took around two to three days.

The department process is simple since one just needs to get the device, connect it to their network, and make the required configurations.

Only a network administrator from the network operations team is required to deploy and maintain the solution.

The solution's implementation process was carried out with the help of a reseller.

Using the solution, I have seen a return on investment.

The solution offers subscription-based licenses. Price-wise, I feel that the solution is a little bit expensive. But it is really worth the money.

I would tell those planning to use the solution that it is worth the money. Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

We make use of it for daily analytics, troubleshooting, and reporting for our production environment. 

We like the periodic upgrades and backups, also made via ADMs, and it makes our environment much more robust and reliable. ADCs have become quite broad, and so should ADMs also.

They need to make the solution a little more familiar with easy study guides, learning videos, etc. Learning content out there is very minimal. They need to bring in more Youtube videos, channels, white papers, etc., along with other Citrix certs.

I'd rate the solution for four years.

The solution is very stable; we've never faced downtime.

It's quite robust and scalable at the moment.

Customer service has degraded a bit compared to past years.

Neutral

We didn't use a different solution previously.

The setup was a bit difficult. However, we could manage it well with the vendor's help.

Yes, we did use the help of a vendor to get everything set up. 

We've witnessed an almost 100% ROI.

They need to make it a little more simple and more comprehensive.

We did not look at much since ADCs and ADMs come as a single package.

Corporations we work for use Citrix Web App and API Protection for security compliance.

The advantage of Citrix Web App and API Protection is just its graphic user interface for beginners. The solution is nothing special, but we have to use it for the corporation. Another advantage of Citrix Web App and API Protection is that we have our copy to test things and get the know-how of it.

An area for improvement in Citrix Web App and API Protection is for it to give real-time notifications and alerts. It would be practical if the solution warns you if there's an attack or if the load or traffic volume increases or decreases.

An additional feature I'd like to see in Citrix Web App and API Protection is a prediction or artificial intelligence on what is happening, for example, attacks.

I've been using Citrix Web App and API Protection for five or six years because of a corporate decision, but for me, the solution is of no use.

Citrix Web App and API Protection is a stable solution, but it doesn't have much use. We had a cluster setup in the past, and the solution lost connectivity, but it's been a year since the latest update, and that issue has been resolved.

Citrix Web App and API Protection is a scalable solution.

I didn't work with other solutions before working with Citrix Web App and API Protection, but my company is currently looking at F5, Nginx, and a cloud solution such as Cloudflare.

The initial setup for Citrix Web App and API Protection was quite easy. We just installed it, configured the interfaces, and it worked. It only took one day until full production.

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.

My company is working with Citrix Web App and API Protection, but the team doesn't like the solution.

The team used version 11 of Citrix Web App and API Protection. Version 12 of the solution stopped working on the exchange server because of authentication issues. It serves as a proxy, but you can do it with Apache or Nginx if you want. There's nothing special with the solution in terms of protection and no notification if there's an issue, so Citrix Web App and API Protection does not have much use.

About ten people use Citrix Web App and API Protection in my company.

My advice to people who want to implement the solution is "Better not start".

My rating for Citrix Web App and API Protection, if you have the solution, would be in the middle. There's no practical use for it for technical system administrators. I'm rating it six out of ten.

I don't know the exact relationship with Citrix, but it seems my company has the license for partners in terms of usage.

One of our customers uses the solution for his payment portal.

The solution can be configured very granularly and has good control over security. I can customize it for different web portals. If one customer has five portals and I need different configurations for those five portals, I can use the configuration multiple times. I can do different configurations for each web portal. I can configure a different combination of configurations for various portals. On top of that, I can define security at its best. It is one of the most granular control firewalls.

The solution's pricing is very high compared to its competitors. This is the only challenge I faced when I tried to sell the solution for VPN, L7 firewall, or GSLB solution. I would like to enhance the solution's bot protection features.

Citrix Web App and API Protection is a very stable solution.

Citrix Web App and API Protection is a scalable solution. If I want to upgrade it, I just need to add licenses to it. Around 2,000 to 3,000 users are using the solution from my customer’s side. The solution was deployed in a single location.

It took around one week to conclude and deploy the policy for Citrix Web App and API Protection. Two to three people were involved in the solution's configuration.

The solution's pricing is very high compared to its competitors.

Our customer has an API for payment gateway integration, and the solution provides very good security for that. The customer is satisfied, and the configuration and appliance are stable. I can scale that bigger appliance, and it is a seamless solution for the customer and us.

I didn't face any challenges while integrating the solution into the existing system. When we sell the solution, we check the prerequisites, authentication, and integration requirements from the customer side. We check what kind of applications, authentication, and other things need to be integrated with the solution.

We give the solution based on all those considerations so that we do not face any hurdles in the future. So, I didn't find any integration issues with the solution till now.

The solution's deployment is very flexible. I'm able to create any kind of granular policy because of the solution's technology, configuration style, or language, which benefits customers.

Before choosing the solution, users should check what kind of integration they want to do with it. Most integrations are available with Citrix Netscaler, but I would recommend checking all the authentication systems, like multi-factor authentication, before placing the order. I would recommend the solution to other users.

Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.