NetScaler Reviews

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.

• Load Balancing: Why? Availability/Performance: Those are the core features of the product and the main reason for the purchase of an ADC in my company. These features bring a lot of resources that improve the experience of the users.
• NetScaler Gateway: Why? Availability/Security: We delivered more than 200 applications thru Xenapp. This feature give us the possibility to deliver the applications anywhere. Currently, 30% of access is made through our NetScaler Gateway (Internet connections).
• Global Server Load Balancing: Why? Availability: Bring us the possibility to load balance our ISPs links, delivering DNS responses thru available ISP providers.
• Reverse Proxy/AAA Authentication: Why? Availability/Security: Many local websites/applications are now available through the internet, with NetScaler acting as reverse proxy, and through AAA authentication in order to authenticate only necessary users.

We are replacing the necessity of any kind of load balance software/components (like Microsoft NLB, SAP Web Dispatcher, DNS Round Robin) and begin to centralize all Load Balancing necessities in the same NetScaler Hardware.

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).

We have used this solution for four years.

We deployed this solution in a two-node cluster. In the beginning, we struggled to make it work properly. We also felt a lack of documentation for complex environments like ours. After some time and with external help, we make it work as it was supposed to function.

I did not encounter any issues with scalability.

I would give technical support a rating of 7/10.

The initial setup was complex. Usually, NetScaler implementations are made using the HA feature. We adopted the cluster feature. We noticed that there was a lack of knowledge from the community and Citrix support in this area. Our complex environment of network made the initial setup more difficult.

We evaluated F5 and Brocade.

Be careful in the choice of a partner to implement this product.

By using this solution, we are accessing our server's resources in a secure manner. It has complete end-to-end encryption, and it provides secure data access. It doesn't matter where our users are sitting or from where they are coming to our network.

It has been a very useful solution for us. It has allowed us to manage the application accessibility even during the pandemic. We have complete visibility of application accessibility and any malicious activities. We also have an analytics report. Thus, we are able to provide support for our infrastructure in a very secure manner.

Content filtering, security layer, and application customization features are the most valuable.

When a new version comes out, sometimes, my existing configuration gets wiped out. They should work on this so that my existing configuration doesn't get impacted with an upgrade to a newer version.

There could also reduce frequent firmware upgrade activities and have a stable version so that once we upgrade it, we don't have to upgrade it for two to three years.

It has been a while since I have been using this solution.

It is very stable. I would give it a nine out of ten.

It has good scalability. I would give a nine out of ten for scalability. It is up to the mark in terms of maintaining the security of my environment while upgrading the product. We have more than 1,000 users. As of now, we don't have any plans to increase its usage. We will definitely increase its usage if there is a need in the future.

Their technical support is good.

I have used other solutions, but they could not fulfill my requirement of application connectivity, printing, and other things. This solution meets my requirements, and I am happy with it.

It is a user-supportive environment. It is easy to add a new feature or platform. Our deployment was done in a phased manner, and it took us a month to complete the deployment.

Its licensing cost is much higher than other products, but it is acceptable because it is a one-time investment, and we are getting our requirements fulfilled when we buy this product. So, there is no issue with the pricing.

I would advise others to first do the assessment of the requirement. Based on the requirements and assessment, you can evaluate the product to see whether your requirements are getting fulfilled or not. Based on that only, you should go for a solution, but I'm sure if you adopt this, you will find it to be a very good solution.

By working with Citrix ADM, I have learned how to work in a mixed and seamless environment while accepting the challenge of providing seamless connectivity in a secure manner to all business users.

I would rate Citrix ADM a nine out of ten.

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.

Our primary use case is the hosting and delivering of web applications.

The product has helped us a lot with load balancing because we had limited experience with it.

The most valuable feature is the management and application delivery for Layer 7 traffic.

At the current time, the solution is not missing any features that I would like to have implemented.

This is a stable product that we have used since 2014.

This solution is scalable, and the sizing is defined by the amount of traffic. Our first box supports up to five hundred megabits of traffic, whereas our second box supports traffic of five gigabits. We will consider making use of this solution in any project going forward.

We have a contract with the re-seller, who has good expertise. If they cannot fix the issue then they escalate it to Citrix, where the tickets are usually solved. Sometimes this takes a little longer because of the multilevel ticket priority. Ideally, it should be possible for the re-seller to assign it directly to level three.

Prior to this, we used the Cisco ACE solution until the product was discontinued.

The initial setup was a little complex. We needed to choose the right partner to assist us with setup and implementation.

We contracted our re-seller to help with installation and setup. The deployment took approximately one month.

We have a yearly licencing fee, and there are no additional costs.

We used Cisco ACE, and they were the ones who recommended that we switch to this solution. We took their advice and we are pleased with it.

Customers need to look to the future and purchase the right model for their necessities. A new license can be purchased, rather than additional boxes.

I would rate this solution nine out of ten.

Not many of our customers use the solution's web application firewall. We use the solution's IP Reputation and bot protection features. We use the solution mostly as Citrix and Gateway ICA proxy and load balancing. There are a lot of changes with the solution, but Citrix NetScaler has quite a comprehensive portfolio of training courses.

The licensing model and technical support of the solution could be improved. The exchange rate with the local currency contributes a lot to why some of our customers are looking at alternatives.

I have been working with Citrix NetScaler since it first came onto the market. I have been using the solution before the Gateway feature was a part of NetScaler, and it was a stand-alone product. I have been using the solution since Citrix acquired the product.

Citrix NetScaler is a scalable solution.

Citrix NetScaler has many features. The solution's basic features, like load balancing and Gateway, are pretty easy to use. It becomes complicated very, very quickly in large environments because it has many features. I would recommend the solution to other users.

There are much cheaper alternatives if you just need the solution for basic load balancing. There are no alternatives to Citrix NetScaler if you want to use it as a Gateway and access it from the public network. Integrating Citrix NetScaler with the existing infrastructure and applications is pretty straightforward once you get the hang of things.

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

With Citrix ADM, one can manage NetScaler and ADC. One can also gather data on remote users, especially information on their bandwidth and the resources they use.

Feature, wise, one of the things that I use is the SSL dashboard to make sure my certificates are up-to-date on my NetScalers. So, it's very handy.

Some features of Citrix ADM are available on the cloud, which could really be helpful if they were available on an on-premise version. At the moment, I can't explain it in detail since I don't utilize the Microapps or StyleBooks in the solution, even though both are available in the cloud version. However, they are not available in the on-premise version. So, I use the on-premise version.

I have experience with Citrix ADM for twenty years. I am a reseller and a partner of Citrix.

It's a virtual appliance, and once it's up and running, it just runs. So, it is a stable product.

Just one solution can handle thousands of users and hundreds of ADCs. So, it is a very convenient tool to use.

Currently, the support team is experiencing a shortage of staff, making it difficult for users to reach someone knowledgeable.

The solution's initial setup was very easy. If ten means super easy, I rate it only an eight on a rating bar.

I would recommend those planning to use the solution, especially if they use or have ADCs or NetScalers in their environment. There are a lot of people who don't use the solution when they should.

There's still a lot of scope for growth and many features that can be added to the solution. Also, I'm unfamiliar with some of the features, so I can't speak on all of them now. Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.