NetScaler Reviews

We primarily use the solution for load balancing and SSL offloading. It's mostly for load balancing, however, occasionally we use it for the SSL offloading and content switching.

The load balancing on the solution is excellent.

The fact that you can do content switching is very useful.

The pricing is pretty good.

The solution is easy to work with and manage.

It's cloud-ready and we can manage it both on-premises and on the cloud if we need to.

The multi-tenancy isn't ideal.

The solution should be able to scale more effectively than it does.

Technical support could be improved upon.

Recently, we tried to configure AAA authentification and we ran into some issues using the web-based GUI. When you are on the console it works, however, when you're on the web-based version when you log in with your AAA credentials, it's very very slow. That is something that we're beginning to see and something they need to address.

We've been using the solution for over six years at this point.

The stability is okay. We haven't dealt with any bugs at all.

A big requirement for us is to be able to scale for multi-tenancy, and this solution doesn't really provide for that. We're looking into another model that might be able to help us handle this.

The technical support is okay. However, they could still improve their services.

I've worked with F5 and found it hard to work with and manage, in comparison to Citrix.

The initial setup was pretty straightforward. I wouldn't say that it was tedious due to the fact that the vendor who we got to assist us already had experience in deployment. They made it pretty easy. After the POC it was simple to deploy into the production environment.

We have less than 20 engineers that are working with and maintaining the product.

Our vendor helped us deploy the solution. They made the process pretty efficient and we were satisfied with eh results.

The solution offers quite good value for money. For the amount you pay, you get a fairly robust product.

We're just customers.

I would recommend this solution to other organizations as it's quite easy to use. There's so much that you can do, compared to F5, for example. With F5, you have to do a lot of tweaking to be able to achieve certain things. 

With Citrix, due to the infrastructure, we run very very easily. We run on ECA infrastructure and it's a great thing. It's very very straightforward. With F5, it's not as good. 

That said, it has some flaws that need to be corrected.

On a scale of one to ten, I would rate it at an 8.

We are using Citrix ADC as a VPN appliance, and use it as a load balancer for a few different services.

We have a custom application that we use, and we were able to port it over from a legacy system into the ADC.

I find all of it to be valuable, because of the flexibility that is built into this product.

If we need an on-premises load balancer, it's easy enough to spin those up here an there and the VPN seems to be pretty solid as well.

The licensing model that Citrix employs need to be improved. There are specific features that we like but are not available at our licensing level.

There are certain features that are very useful and Citrix makes you pay a bit more for them. I think that they should be included as default features.

In the next release, I would like to have the ability to inspect the SSL payload. It should be included by default.

I have been using Citrix ADC for almost a year.

It's a stable product and I haven't found any issues with it. It's been working well for us this entire time.

Scalability is not really applicable in our case. We have moved towards the cloud.

I don't believe that we plan to scale on-premises any further.

We have approximately 500 users in the company who are using this solution.

Technical support is good. We have reached out a couple of times and they were able to assist us quickly, even on the weekend.

I would rate technical support a nine out of ten.

It depends on who you get, there are some who want to redirect you to professional services. Once you get them on board, their service is good.

Previously, we used Juniper VPN. The hardware was older.

The initial setup was fairly complex. There is a bit of a learning curve.

We worked with professional services during our deployment.

It's an expensive product but it works well.

My advice to anyone who is looking at implementing Citrix ADC is if they need flexibility, it's a stable product. It's one of the better appliances that I have used, even in a virtual environment, it's working great. I can recommend it.

I would rate Citrix ADC a nine out of ten.

We use this solution for screening access, so certain people have access to certain applications. It's a good solution to deliver applications to users who are located in geographically distinct locations. The product means you can have control and still deliver the applications. We have a partnership with Citrix and I'm technology vice president. 

I like that the solution can be made available on any device and can be accessed on a wide area network - it allows for better performance for technology applications.

The process itself could be improved by making it more flexible because it has become really complicated to deploy. Implementing the application delivery mechanism model system has become more difficult over time and more complicated to handle.

I would like to see a simplification of initials. 

I've been using this solution for a very long time, since it was first established. 

It's a stable solution. 

It's a scalable solution. 

Technical support is average, sometimes response times are a little slow.

Deployment takes quite a lot of planning and the cost of implementation is based on the number of users. You need to have clarity about the architecture to get an idea of how long deployment will take.  

If a company wants to have a secure environment and they want the performance then this is a good solution.

I would rate this solution a nine out of 10. 

I use Citrix NetScaler in my company for mostly two-factor authentication.

The most valuable feature of the solution is the two-factor authentication.

From an improvement perspective, the tool should be made easier in the area of the configuration capabilities that it provides to users. Currently, it is not easy to use the configuration capabilities of the product.

I have been using Citrix NetScaler for a month. I use the solution's latest version.

It is a very stable solution. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

It is a scalable solution. Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

Around 100 employees in my company use the product.

The product's initial setup phase was easy.

I did not do the product's installation. My colleagues managed the product's installation phase.

The solution is deployed on an on-premises model.

I don't know about the maintenance part of the solution since the server we use in our company is operated from some other location.

The global server load balancing feature of Citrix NetScaler has improved our company's application availability.

I can recommend the product to those who plan to use it.

I rate the overall tool a nine out of ten.

I use the solution for its access gateway and endpoint management features to balance services.

The solution's most valuable features are low latency, reverse proxy, content switching, and access gateway.

We face challenges with the solution's firmware upgrades frequently. They should improve this particular area. 

I have been using the solution for nine years.

I rate the solution's stability as an eight. 

It is a very scalable solution. 

The solution's technical support team is good.

The solution's initial setup was straightforward. The deployment takes only a few hours. I rate the process a ten out of ten.

It is an enterprise solution. Thus, its costs are reasonable.

I recommend the solution to others and rate it as a ten. 

The primary use case is for troubleshooting how users are experiencing the Citrix environment.

The most valuable features are for the ADMs and the overall monitoring environment.

I would like to see the virtual and desktop license included in the pricing.

I have been working with Citrix ADM for a number of years.

I have found the scalability to be acceptable.

The initial setup was straightforward and simple. The installation took about an hour.

I did the installation in-house.

The pricing could be lower. The actual device itself is included in the license, so the fact that you have to license virtual machines on it is the price point that could be lower.

I would rate Citrix ADM an eight on a scale of one to ten.

There's a very powerful content switching capability, load balancing capability, and SSL offloading, layer-to-firewall capabilities, routine capabilities, policies, and rewrite policy capabilities. So there are a lot of capabilities in this solution.

The most valuable feature is SSL offloading.

The solution can improve their support and send tickets directly to a Citrix ADC engineer in order to avoid having to escalate each support call.

I have been using the solution for 20 years.

The solution is extremely stable.

The solution is scalable.

I think that the solution needs to be handled by a team of Citrix ADC engineers, not just a normal support desk. Every single time you log a support call, it has to be escalated anyway, so why not just give us direct access to the Citrix ADC engineers?

Neutral

The initial setup is straightforward with some training. You can get the solution up and running out of the box, but training does help. Deployment can be completed in three days if you have all the bits and pieces in place. We use three technical engineers for deployment.

The deployment was completed in-house.

You can do CapEx and then a yearly monthly fee, or you can do a subscription model, whether that's one month, month-to-month, or three-year subscription model. I give the solution an eight out of ten for pricing.

I give the solution a nine out of ten.

We currently have 40 - 45 people using the solution.

I recommend using an integrator that knows what they're doing. You need to validate the integrator's capabilities.

I think it's a really, really solid, well-run, nice solution.

My primary use case is for disaster recovery.

The best feature of Citrix is its track record of stability in its features.

An area for improvement would be the difficulty in finding information about standard licensing costs over the internet. They should provide some reference prices on the net to be quickly referred to. I would also like to see virtualization of the ad systems in the next release.

Citrix is a pretty robust and stable product. It has an edge because it's more stable than other solutions like Avaya and VMWare.

This solution is scalable.

I would rate this solution as eight out of ten.