NetScaler Reviews

There are two major verticals for Citrix: VDI and NetScaler. For NetScaler, our major use cases are database load balancing, PowerVPN VPN access gateway, WAF (Web Application Firewall), and content switching. But most of them are for load balancing, access gateway, and VPN for NetScaler.

And for VDI, the major use cases are definitely securing the data and centralizing the entire infrastructure to the data center. Another major use case is publishing in-house applications for end-users who are working from home or from remote locations.

Our organization doesn't use it because we're very small. However, we have deployed the service for more than 10,000 users. Our smallest customer had 25 users, and the biggest customer had over 10,000 users.

We have eight people in the maintenance team for Citrix NetScaler, plus 24/7 customer support for day-to-day issues. They are managing multiple customers. Their expertise is at the level of RL1, three at RL2, one at L3, and one at L4.

For VDI, centralization, data protection, and data management are the most important features. As for NetScaler, its key features include a firewall, GSLB, load balancing, and an actual gateway. These are the four tiers of NetScalers.

Pricing is one area for improvement. It's on the higher side because NetScaler is a premium product used for over 70% of internet traffic worldwide. However, price is not the only concern. Manageability and adaptability can also be challenging for end customers, who may require the assistance of experts like us to deploy and manage the product effectively. Although this is good for us as partners, it can limit the product's appeal to customers who prioritize ease of use.

Moreover, having some GUI-based tools for log management and troubleshooting would be helpful and make it easier for customers to manage and troubleshoot their databases.

For the future release of Citrix NetScaler, I would like to see better pricing, as well as improved manageability and log management features.

Another thing is if a problem occurs, we have to rely on the central support system. We need to collect the log and send it back to support for analysis, and then Citrix support will provide the solution. It would be much easier to troubleshoot if something is handy, such as a web portal or a common platform where customers can upload logs and resolve some of the issues automatically.

I have been working with Citrix for over twelve or fifteen years, so I know everything about Citrix. We are using the latest update of this product.

It is a rock-solid solution, and I would rate it a ten out of ten.

It is a scalable solution. I would rate it a nine out of ten.

Previously, their support was great, especially two years ago. But these days, I'm seeing lots of slowness in providing solutions. The L1 support team is not ready, or the L2 team has a lot of work and is overburdened.

Therefore, sometimes they are very good and sometimes slow in responding, resulting in slow solution delivery.

Neutral

The deployment process is quite complex because it's a premium or tier-one product. It requires great knowledge and experience to make it easier. If you don't have the necessary knowledge and experience, you may struggle.

Moreover, the deployment process depends on the customer's requirements and priorities. If the customer is focusing on multiple options or use cases, it may take seven to ten days. But if it's a straightforward installation with only one solution, then two or three days is more than enough.

We are using both on-premises and cloud-based versions.

We have a good team of ten people in India, and we are expanding our partnerships all over the world. We have even received orders from the USA. We are focusing more and more on the interaction market and are not looking to hire any consultants or other sources. Our company is the SI (system Integrator) for the product.

It's a good investment tool. If your own organization or any other organization invests in this product, it will be useful for their product line. This product is robust and reliable, which helps customers a lot.

The cost of the product depends on the customer's requirements, so there is no fixed price. There are multiple licensing models. There are no additional costs for using this product. It comes with a support bundle, and the licensing is subscription-based. It means that you have to pay on a yearly basis.

Citrix can be quite expensive, and it can be challenging to qualify or close leads for 50 users or less than 100 users. Therefore, we are considering evaluating multiple products in parallel and finalizing one product we can pitch in our product line.

I would recommend using Citrix. Overall, I would rate it an eight out of ten because every product has room for improvement. If I rated it a nine, it means there's almost no room for improvement, which is not entirely true. So, eight is a fair rating.

We used Citrix NetScaler for load balancing in our application, where our users connect via the portal. This portal is load-balanced via a ServiceNet NetScaler. Additionally, our core banking application also runs on this infrastructure.

Citrix NetScaler has its capabilities and benefits. From a security standpoint, It is a comprehensive solution in a single box. We also have additional features such as gateway and global service load balancing. Furthermore, there's a provision for expanding data capacity.

In the latest version of Citrix NetScaler, there are specific improvements in the appliances, particularly in the management interfaces, which were not available in previous versions. If one device or switch fails, the failover to another device is not seamless which is painful. There needs some changes in their subscription-based model.

I've been using Citrix NetScaler for over four years. In 2020, we purchased two NetScalers for our Citrix solution. It's effective in load balancing. We always stay updated on critical vulnerability updates.

More than 5000+ users are using this solution.

We purchase support every year, making it more convenient. We have dedicated support and assistance with the subscription, ensuring stability.

The initial setup is neither difficult nor straightforward, but some products have their challenges, but it's a good product.

Deployment depends on the requirement. After complete connectivity and power on, it will have some configuration requirements.

Local vendors are also available for the solution's deployment.

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

Citrix ADC is deployed on our VMware cluster. We use Citrix ADC for Virtual Virtual Desktop Infrastructure(VDI), load balancing, and SSL offloading.

The most valuable feature of Citrix ADC is its ease of use.

Citrix ADC can improve if it provides a more user-friendly interface and clear working protocols. Citrix is not working with classic RFC, it is working with Citrix RFC, which is not common in the world. If engineers of Citrix can provide us with more information on working with the classic IP networks it would be a benefit.

I have been using Citrix ADC for approximately three years.

The stability of Citrix ADC is not working well. We have one cluster of firewalls and the firewall can switch from active mode to standby mode, but in active mode, Citrix is not recognizing the ARP or MAC address. When the ARP lease timer ends it is working properly again.

We have approximately 10,000 users using Citrix ADC.

The main IT and network security departments are using this solution the most.

I wrote many emails about the lease ARP timer problem we were facing to Citrix, but they did not respond to my question.

I have previously used F5 BIG-IP. Citrix is more user-friendly and scalable for engineers for doing configuring. The dashboards and interface are better in Citrix ADC than F5 BIG-IP.

I found Citrix ADC the better solution.

The initial setup of Citrix ADC is easy. I have been doing it for many years.

We have 10 network engineers that do the configuration and maintenance of Citrix ADC.

F5 BIG-IP is much more expensive than Citrix ADC. For example, If we choose two platforms, Citrix ADC, 3000 version, and we choose F5, F4200 version. F5 BIG-IP has connections, timers, and throughput similar to Citrix ADC, but the price is very expensive.

Citrix ADC is scalable.

I recommend Citrix ADC to all of my friends and engineers.

I rate Citrix ADC a nine out of ten.

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.

I use Citrix NetScaler to secure and reliable access to our back-end applications hosted in our data center. With its robust features like SSL security, content switching, load balancing, and application firewalling, it streamlines traffic management and enhances overall performance while keeping our data safe from threats.

The most valuable feature for us is the application firewalling in Citrix NetScaler, ensuring only valid traffic enters our environment. Additionally, it provides insights into the origin and destination of traffic within our data center, giving us control and visibility over our network performance.

Citrix NetScaler is a robust product, but mastering it requires significant learning and training due to its complexity. While it could be easier to manage, it is like transitioning from driving a car to flying a plane – a different experience altogether. 

Additional features could include better integration with community-developed scripts and APIs, making it easier for users to access and utilize these resources. Streamlining the interface and ensuring standardization would enhance usability and provide smoother integration with third-party services.

I have been working with Citrix NetScaler for about 20 years.

I would rate Citrix stability at nine out of ten because it is solid, but many issues stem from neglecting regular maintenance. If you overlook upkeep like clearing disk space, even the best products can falter, but it is not the fault of Citrix NetScaler itself.

The scalability of Citrix NetScaler is impressive, ranging from small setups to handling gigabit-level traffic. It is designed for clustering and can sync data traffic across multiple interfaces, making it highly adaptable to varying needs. In our organization, we serve several large clients, with some deployments handling up to 7,000 users daily.

The technical support is very good.

Setting up Citrix NetScaler can vary from straightforward to complex, depending on the deployment requirements. For basic setups, it is easy, but for more intricate configurations involving clusters and firewall settings, it becomes complex and requires expertise. While there are ARM templates available for deployment, understanding your specific needs is crucial for achieving the desired outcomes.

Using Citrix NetScaler provides immense value to our organization. Its indispensable role is in facilitating remote access and managing various assets, whether on-premises, cloud, or hybrid.

Having a robust load balancer like Citrix NetScaler is essential for our infrastructure. While there are other options like F5 and Azure load balancers, NetScaler stands out with its comprehensive features beyond just basic traffic routing, offering advanced functionalities like security controls, content switching, and application firewalling.

Citrix NetScaler enhances our application delivery by intelligently directing traffic to healthy servers and services. It ensures that even if a server is up, but its services are down, traffic is rerouted to functioning servers, preventing downtime and ensuring a smooth user experience. With built-in probes, it continuously monitors the health of services, identifying issues and optimizing traffic flow accordingly.

The SSL upload feature in Citrix NetScaler has significantly improved our security by encrypting traffic and ensuring data integrity. Additionally, the global server load balancing capability allows us to efficiently host multiple services behind a single static IP address, streamlining deployment and reducing the need for multiple certificates and IP addresses.

The analytics and reporting capabilities of Citrix NetScaler have improved significantly in the past year.

For those considering Citrix NetScaler, my advice is to research its capabilities thoroughly to understand which features align with your needs. Start by experimenting with one feature at a time and learn as you go to maximize its potential for your organization.

Overall, I would rate Citrix NetScaler as a nine out of ten.

We use this solution for Layer 7 load balancing for our clients, as well as single sign-on functionality, and uploading the data from their applications.

The load balancing feature of this solution is very good.

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.

We have been working with this solution since 2009.

We have found this solution to be stable during our time working with it.

We have found this solution to be difficult to scale out due to the complexity of the licensing model.

The technical support for this solution is good, in our experience.

Positive

The initial setup for this solution is very easy, and will require one engineer for a cloud-based deployment, or two engineers for an on-premises setup.

However, the time the implementation will take is dependent on the size and complexity of the project. Full deployment can take from three days, up to a few months for the most complicated integration requirements.

The licenses for this product are payable as a yearly subscription, and carry a high price-point. The subscription scheme is quite complicated, and costs will increase with each additional feature that is required, outside of the basic setup.

Also, if clients wish to move from an on-premises setup to the cloud-based version of the solution, the licenses are not transferable.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We deploy it for enterprise customers and some schools that are located in Denmark.

The load balancing is one of the most valuable features. We have several load balancing solutions like F5 and Fortinet.

I will try to migrate all the tools to the cloud because there is more lab and more VPN scalability available in the cloud. It is not available on-premises.

I have been using Citrix for the past four years. 

Of course it is stable. We have had some errors, like authentication issues, although those are easy to fix.

It is scalable enough. 

We started with 100 users and now are up to 2,500.

We have contacted their technical support. They provided their contact details, the account manager details, so we contacted them frequently and as required. They are very good. 

We are also familiar with F5.

The initial setup was straightforward. It's deployed in our central location and four different other plants. It's not complex for those types of environments. Including the network setup, the entire deployment took 45 days. 

I did the deployment together with my team. The deployment required four advanced engineers. 

We also evaluated Fortinet but we found that it is not that good a solution in terms of it being user-friendly and it was not very scalable. Comparatively, FortiGate is a good option, and reading-wise I think it's good.

I would tell someone considering this solution to know your use cases and get good documentation. 

When we experienced an issue, we made documents and we can share those documents and share all the details to help provide others with solutions. 

I would rate it a six out of ten.