NetScaler Reviews

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.

The solution is used primarily for load balancing and content switching, but we also use it for VPN, SSL VPN, and ICA Proxy. One of the bigger use cases that comes up often is web application firewalling and security. There's a lot of growth in our clients' environments at the moment. There's also significant regulatory compliance required and we deploy ADC with multifactor authentication to have a layer of protection for our customer information. We are partners of Citrix and resellers of this solution. 

The web application firewalling component is probably the most powerful feature as it can identify attacks on the network at an application level which is quite important. There is also good functionality where we use IP reputation and geofencing to mitigate threats from the outside world.

Citrix can improve their quality assurance by ironing out security vulnerabilities before releasing upgrades. They are quite proactive in identifying vulnerabilities, but it would be helpful if they could identify them prior to release. The support on the ADCs isn't that great and there's a lot of work required with upgrading plant environments because of security vulnerabilities that come to light. I'd also like to see some improvement on the monitoring side. Things are better than they were but the interface can be a little cumbersome sometimes. It's not always easy to get the information that you're looking for.

I've been using this solution for seven years. 

Stability is pretty good. Our company has logged perhaps one or two calls for stability issues, but they have generally related to environment variables that are outside our control.

Scaling up or out is fairly straightforward. Based on the software license, we can unlock additional capacity, functionality and throughput purely by installing a higher-rated license. From an upgrade point of view, it's not a case of ripping and replacing hardware every so often, the solution is fairly robust in that sense.

Complexity of the initial setup depends on the use case. It can be fairly straightforward depending on what you're trying to achieve, but the more complex deployments are, of course, more complicated. Depending on the use case, deployment can take anywhere from a day to a couple of weeks. On the web application firewalling side, it can take some time, but standard ICA proxy, SSL, VPN, load balancing, and content switching, are fairly straightforward to get up and running quickly. We have 15 users in our company.

Licensing depends on your environment and the size and scale of the deployment. There are options to purchase a standard, advanced or premium license, each of which unlocks different feature sets and capabilities. We also have a throughput license that ties into that, whether it's 20, 100 or 200 megs. It really depends on the environment. If I look at competitors such as F5, the costs and functionalities we offer are the same but at a much-reduced cost.

Whether this is a suitable solution depends on what the client's trying to achieve, the type of applications they want to publish, and the security metrics they're looking at. We provide predominantly Citrix-based solutions so if there is a use case, we would definitely recommend Citrix, not only because of its functionality, but because that's our specialization. We implement the full stack of Citrix solutions.

Because of the functionality, scalability and stability of the solution as a whole, I rate ADC eight out of 10. 

We have Citrix StoreFront to access everything from a remote desk. We use it with Office 365 so that we can access Teams. 

The solution is very stable.

The product is scalable. 

It would be ideal if there were more integration capabilities. That's something that could improve. 

Technical support could be improved. 

The solution could offer a higher level of security.

I've been using the solution for about five or six years. It's been a while. 

The solution has been very stable. I don't recall dealing with bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable.

The solution can scale. If a company needs to expand usage, it can do so. It's not a problem.

We currently have 400 users on the solution right now. 

I've contacted technical support in the past. Their level of service is inconsistent. Sometimes it's good and other times not as much. It depends. 

The installation was handled by a specific department and not by myself. I work in an area of the government and don't contact that department directly. Therefore, I can't speak to the overall experience of the initial setup. I can't say if it is difficult or straightforward. 

I don't have any details in relation to the pricing. It's not an aspect of the solution that I take care of. 

I'm a customer and an end-user. I don't have any special relationship with Citrix. 

I'd rate the solution at a ten out of ten. We've been very happy with its capabilities overall.

I would recommend the solution to other users, departments, and companies. 

Compared to other solutions, Citrix ADC is much more robust in terms of the native integration to cloud platforms. It is far more robust from an operational point of view as well.

Their support is also pretty good.

Native integration needs to be improved. You cannot build ISE codes natively. For DevOps, integration would be very helpful because it would be a lot simpler from an operational standpoint.

The initial configuration needs to be rearchitected because of the limitations that are present with the cloud. It would be good if these limitations could be removed.

Improving the scalability would be really good as well.

I've worked with it for a few years.

It's primarily a cloud solution.

It is a stable solution.

The on-demand scalability options are not good.

The technical support from Citrix is good.

The initial setup is straightforward if your enterprise requirements are very simple. However, this is usually not the case, and then, the configurations are not straightforward.

It takes approximately two days to set it up. You would need a team of six, including engineers and senior tech leads.

There isn't much of a difference between the cost of Citrix and that of other similar solutions.

In terms of capability, Citrix ADC is much better than F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM).

Stability-wise, it's also much better than F5, but feature-wise, it's exactly the same. 

Technical support-wise, Citrix ADC is far better than F5.

My recommendation would strictly be to look forward to cloud native because of the operationality, scalability, and native integration in terms of the CI/CD pipeline or DevOps pipeline. It's quite easy if you do that.

Then, if you consider using third-party tools like Citrix ADC, know that there are problems with native integration.

In terms of capability, I would rate Citrix ADC at seven on a scale from one to ten.

We use it for web applications, firewalling, EDOS protection, load balancing, and content switching. There are quite a lot of use cases that we use it for. It just depends on what the client requires. It's a multi-purpose software.

It's a well-rounded, well-featured product that is quite flexible in terms of covering quite a lot of use cases depending on the client's environment.

It's quite a competitive solution if you compare it to others. It's one of the market leaders in terms of functionality and features.

It's a stable product.

The solution can scale.  

Technical support could be improved. 

I've used the solution for seven years or so. 

It's a stable product. I'd rate its reliability eight out of ten. There are few bugs, and it doesn't crash or freeze. 

The scalability is fine. I'd rate its ability to scale ten out of ten. 

We aren't fully satisfied with technical support at this time. We'd like them to have a faster response time. Sometimes those responding to requests aren't technical enough, and the case needs to be passed through to someone else. 

Neutral

We did not previously use a different solution. 

How long the solution takes to deploy depends on what features are deployed. The deployment of the VPN and general balancing stuff doesn't take too much time. However, if you are looking at web applications and/or firewalling, it can get a bit more complex. The implementation will take longer. 

I'd rate the ease of setup an eight out of ten. There are some complex configurations, however, it isn't something that we generally can't handle ourselves. 

The initial setup is usually done by our team. We would usually reach out to the vendor for support in the case of a bug or something like that.

I'm not involved in licensing aspects of the solution and cannot speak to the exact cost of the product. 

There is only a licensing fee. There aren't any extra costs attached.

We did not previously evaluate other options. We use Citrix a lot. It's our bread and butter. 

We're Citrix partners. 

I'm using the latest version of the solution. 

We have multiple implementations of the product, including on the cloud and on-premises. When we use the cloud version, we use Azure and AWS. 

I'd rate the product 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 are just publishing applications. We have some clients who need access to these. So, we're hosting the applications for clients. We're also publishing VDIs and using it for processing VDIs.

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.

We are looking for some in-depth monitoring and analytics and more information that Citrix Director doesn't provide. ControlUp has insights that not only give you an overview but also allow you to do some drill-down troubleshooting for what's going on in your environment. We are looking for some more analytical and monitoring data to be able to monitor the environment better, not only from an application standpoint but also from the standpoint of the infrastructure to everything it sits on. They can provide more data to the administrators about what's going on within the application. They can provide data not only on the application side but also about what the application sits on. They're making strides with Citrix Analytics in regards to that.

My team has been using it for at least four to five years, and I just joined this team.

It has been pretty stable. The only thing that we've ever experienced is when someone is installing a bad patch or something like that. That has usually been a user error. It wasn't the product; it was the person implementing the patch.

It is very scalable. That's another reason why our company went with Citrix. It is very scalable and versatile. If you are trying to provide to a group that doesn't necessarily need a full-fledged desktop, you can just publish out whatever application is needed. A lot of groups are very appreciative of that. A lot of groups just want to be able to get to the applications they need to do their work. They don't really want to be bogged down with a full-fledged desktop if they just need one application. Citrix gives you the capability to just do that.

You could publish it to many devices. It doesn't have to be a specific desktop. It could be a tablet as long as a person has access to the internet. You're publishing it into a portal where they can just get to that application from anywhere as long as they have maybe an RSA token, Duo, or some type of security authentication and their phone. We have users who are impressed by the fact that they can get to it. As long as they have their Citrix workspace client on their phone, they can get to wherever they need. It is very versatile in delivery.

Right now, we have about 5,000 to 6,000 onshore and offshore users. Our environment supports healthcare, so we need the ability to deliver to those users who may be working within a hospital. As long as they have an internet connection and a browser, they can access our applications. It has been a very valuable tool that allows us to present that outside our environment.

We've had to use them on occasions, and they've been very on point for the initial triaging as well as for the follow-ups. I would rate them an eight or nine out of ten. It was maybe after hours, and it took some time to get to the right engineering team for the issue. It wasn't like we were just waiting on them. It was just getting us over to the right team for a specific issue. After we actually got on the phone with an engineer, they've always been very helpful in getting the issue resolved.

It is pretty straightforward.

I would advise others to just go through and look at the requirements and the needs of the people you're supporting. I will always recommend doing a POC, just to make sure that the product that you're inquiring about or thinking about purchasing does what it says it does because you don't want to be oversold something and it under-delivers. I will always recommend doing some type of POC to test everything out. If it is in your budget, then I would say go with it.

It has improved the way our organization functions. I have been very impressed with the direction in which Citrix is going. I got introduced to Workspace last year, and I attended the virtual SYNERGY conference. It was very impressive to see so many upcoming things that Citrix is working on. I noticed that VMware also has its version of Workspace, so I guess that's the new hot terminology to use. The Citrix solution is called Workspace, and the VMware solution is called Workspace ONE.

I would rate Citrix ADC a nine out of ten. There's always room for improvement for any application. That's why they have different versions or a series of applications.

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.