NetScaler Reviews

It is mainly used for virtual desktop delivery for remote access. We are also using it for load balancing and SSL VPN.

The load balancing and VPN features are most valuable. AAA authentication is also valuable. 

They have specific integration with the product line for application virtualization and desktop virtualization.

Its GUI should be improved. Its CLI is powerful, but GUI needs more features.

I have been using this solution for almost eight years.

It is stable.

They have the software bundle licenses. If you want to add more users, capacity, or throughput on the bandwidth, you can add licenses, and it'll get upgraded.

They also have scalability options with virtualization, and you can use those options as well. Normally, we decide on a particular model depending on the number of users and the use case.

They have different models. An entry-level model supports up to 5,000 users. A mid-range model can support up to 10,000 users, and a high-end model can support up to 40,000 users in the box in HA configuration.

I've contacted them many times. In case of a problem or error, you can raise a support ticket online. Normally, we upload the log. After they analyze the log, they are able to identify the root cause and provide support. In case of a severe issue, they also do a remote session to analyze the issue. They are very helpful.

It is pretty easy and straightforward. A new setup takes maybe a couple of hours.

I would recommend it depending on the use case. If you have a use case for an application controller for load balancing, web application firewall, or virtual infrastructure, you can straight away go for this solution.

I would rate Citrix ADC a nine out of 10.

We use the NetScaler ADC in three primary use cases. The first is to provide load balancing services for our internal applications. The second is for Global Server Load Balancing (GSLB) to provide data center resiliency and failover of our externally accessible services, as well as proximity-based access. The third is for the Unified Gateway to securely provide external access to some of our key applications. We deploy VPX appliances running in our VMware environment.

The GSLB feature allows us to move services between data centers. We can do this in either a planned or unplanned manner. We have experienced service provider outages at our primary data center and GSLB will kick in to automatically modify DNS records to point to a secondary data center (active/passive). We also make use of GeoIP information to point clients to the closest data center for accessing applications.

The features I find most useful are 

• Load Balancing
• GSLB
• Unified Gateway.

I love being able to terminate connections to the boxes and look at all of the packet headers to determine which way I want to send the traffic next. GSLB provides amazing ability to do active/active or active/passive deployment of services. Unified Gateway allows me to provide secure external access to applications for suppliers and customers while requiring Multi-Factor Authentication.

The main areas for improvement would be around documentation and support. If a feature can be used in two or three ways, show that feature being used in all of those ways. Documentation seems to only cover the primary use case and leaves you to either run through trial and error or consult the user community. In terms of support, I have never actually had them solve any of my issues. I have always solved them myself and then provided the resolution to support.

I would rate the NetScaler a nine out of 10. It is a fantastic platform to work with and the features/functionality are top-notch. The only ding would be for the documentation, but the user community is fantastic.

We solely use this solution for Citrix remote access.

This has allowed us to secure Citrix remote access from the internet, as it is currently the only solution available that enables this.

We appreciate that this solution facilitates our access to Citrix internet.

We would like to see some fairly large scale improvement in the configuration process for this solution.

This solution carries a high price point, which we would like to see some reduction in.

We have been using this solution for 10 years now.

We have found this to be a stable solution.

This is a scalable solution in our experience.

The setup for this solution is fairly complex.

We would rate this solution a six out of ten.

• Load balancing business web applications
• Load balancing core infrastructure services e.g. App-V, Ivanti UWM, Citrix Storefront and Director
• Application firewall features WAF for more secure application access
• XenApp/XenDesktop application gateway with two factor authentication
• Use of MAS for analytics and centralised management

• Allows the user to easily scale out application delivery.
• Provides secure remote access.
• Ease of management and business continuity support.
• Powerful, reliable, and feature rich solution all in one appliance.

NetScaler MAS centralised management and analytics makes it is easy to support, manage, monitor, and maintain a NetScaler solution.

It should offer more flexible cost-effective licensing for small to medium sized organizations i.e. a pooled licensing option on entry level MPXs like 5901s.

I like the solution's simplicity compared to Citrix's on-prem solutions. Citrix is not an easy technology, but they tend to make things very simple now.

The solution's pricing is a big concern and should be improved.

I prefer not to contact the solution's technical support. They will not resolve the problem, and we will have to do it ourselves.

Neutral

I rate Citrix Web App and API Protection a six out of ten for the ease of its initial setup.

On a scale from one to ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive, I rate the solution's pricing an eight or nine out of ten.

I have been working with Citrix for more than eight years. I recently discovered Parallels RAS, which is better than Citrix in terms of cost and simplicity. Unlike Citrix, Parallels RAS is an all-in-one solution, and it's easy to deploy.

Overall, I rate Citrix Web App and API Protection a seven out of ten.

It has many use cases. It is used for the high availability of the service and for connecting local sites or geolocation sites called GSNP. 

We are selling all of its models. Citrix ADC can be deployed on the cloud or on-premises.

Citrix ADC has increased the productivity of the staff by keeping all the applications available all the time.

It also increased the security of the online application by enabling the web application firewall feature.

With the amazing scalability features of the Citric ADC, we have been able to save money.

High availability, performance, scalability, and security are the main pillars. It enhances the security for accessing the applications.

It is very user-friendly, and it works fine. The management of the device is very easy from a technical perspective.

It does not have a sandbox cloud service and antivirus. It should have on-prem or cloud sandboxing and antivirus.

I have been using this solution for five years.

It is stable.

It is scalable.

They have awesome support. I can give them a four and a half out of five.

Positive

It has a medium level of complexity. It is not complex, and it is also not that easy.

Its price is comparable to others and affordable.

I would advise doing proper sizing and proper configuration to get the maximum benefits of this solution.

I would rate Citrix ADC an eight out of ten. Everything is very good in this solution.

We used this mostly for disaster recovery plan (DRP), for global service load balancing, and Citrix Access Gateway. 

What I found most valuable from Citrix ADC were the Content Switching and Integrated Caching features which were the things we commonly installed for our customers.

The only thing customers told me that could be improved is that they would like to be able to purchase and receive the products in one box, rather than two boxes. This is something related to marketing, though.

We were partners with Citrix for 15 years. We used it for 15 years.

I also found this solution to be stable.

I found it to be scalable.

Our customers' feedback was that support wasn't the best. Cases were often on queue and there were delays in solving their issues, leading to customers getting angry. Support could be improved.

I was able to try F5 and Radware. The price for Citrix ADC here in Mexico was good when you compare it with F5 and Radware.

The setup was easy. For the first version of this solution, it was not very user-friendly, but in the last edition we used, the setup was very user-friendly.

We implemented it for our customers through our in-house team of 3 consultants. I think 3 people is sufficient for implementing this solution to our customers.

I was able to evaluate F5 and Radware.

My rating for this solution is ten out of ten. I think it is the best product ever.

My recommendation is for customers here in Mexico to try it. I feel it is the best solution in the market, at least here in Mexico. My message to customers here is to try it and they'll never be disappointed with this magic box.

We have published our applications via Citrix and then given access to the business users to access those specific applications via Citrix. We have many applications where multiple users need access - whether it's an EVS or a CRM, all these have been published to Citrix. We also use the solution for the ADC. ADC is a front end, wherein I get queries, and we'll get all the requests from internal and external users as well.

The solution is easy to use. It's very easy to configure. The solution is not very difficult.

Performance-wise it's okay. The solution is stable. 

The solution is easy to set up and the deployment process is quite fast.

The solution could be more secure. 

I've used the solution for four or maybe five years.

The solution is quite stable and the performance is good. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable. The stability is good.

We have about 3,000 users on this solution. The product can scale. 

We are in constant touch with Citrix support. We get a good resolution from them. I'd say that we are quite satisfied with the level of support they provide. 

I also worked with F5. We used it for a couple of years.

The setup process is not overly complex or difficult. The installation should not take more than three to five hours so long as you have the right information on hand. 

Since the solution is straightforward and stable, we only need three or four engineers to handle deployment and maintenance. 

We handled the installation ourselves. We did not need outside help from consultants or integrators. We're capable of handling everything in-house.

There is a licensing fee, and we pay it once a year.

We're a customer and an end-user.

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

I would recommend the solution to others.