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.
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.
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.
We are using the solution for SSL offloading and load balancing.
The configuration for the solution's web application firewall is complicated. It requires technical knowledge. They should improve the process.
We have been using the solution for almost 12 years.
The solution is stable.
I rate the solution's scalability an eight. We have 8000 solution users in our organization.
The solution's technical support is good.
In comparison with Azure and Cisco products, Citrix is a stable solution.
The solution's initial setup process is easy.
The solution is expensive compared to Azure. We purchased its three-year license model.
The solution needs enhancement from a security standpoint. I rate it an eight 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.
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.
We provide the solution to customers on their premises. We use Citrix to provide their network infrastructure for their business solutions. We have an automated scenario implemented where we can deploy architectures with an automation script.
We have good customer support. And since we've been working on the solution for the last five years, it's intuitive to us, and we can provide new solutions, applications, and implementations.
One of the most glitchy things in NetScaler comes whenever they upgrade something. Their upgrades are not very backward compatible, and sometimes they mess up, and we'd have to speak to someone. Also, Citrix is limiting their support for the load balancer to their legacy customers only. They are not providing the services to new customers or clients. Citrix is changing its business model.
We also need more things on a DNS-based system. For some of the new DNS, the features that can be included would be good.
Moreover, the solution should be more user-friendly. If one implements it once, they will get all the dos and don'ts. But first-time users would not know. And the documentation has limits and gaps. First-time users need to go to the support team and get their expertise to get it done.
We have a setup that's been running for the past six years.
I rate the solution's stability a six-and-a-half out of ten. Sometimes, we face issues with upgrading time.
I rate the solution's scalability an eight out of ten.
Since we use quite a lot of electricity, we don't just scale up. We also scale down when we don't need it for cost-effectiveness. With scalability, we are not facing any issues, and the solution works quite well.
We have more than 2,500 individual customers daily. That is the smallest customer base we have on this solution.
I rate the initial setup a six-point five or seven out of ten because it was difficult. Because we have lots of experience already on this product, we understand how to work with it. But people purchasing it and trying to implement it for the first time would need support from the support team. If first-time users mandatorily need support, it's not user-friendly.
Because we have automatic implementations enabled, the solution takes half a day to deploy. But it will take longer for new users. If I were doing a POC, I would probably take three to four business days to deploy the solution.
The deployment process is all automated. We prepare our environment using Ansible scripts.
I rate the pricing an eight out of ten since it is expensive. The pricing can be a problem for smaller businesses.
There is a separate cost grade for the kind of support you get.
I suggest everyone does their own POC because everyone has their requirements. They should do their research and see what fits better for them.
I rate Citrix Web App and API Protection a seven-and-a-half out of ten.