NetScaler Reviews

We use it for our clients' the desktops for their virtual machines.

I like the ease of use. It's easy to manage. I also like it's ease of use with virtualization technologies with applications.

Integration with other third party providers and third party applications could be better because it can be a bit complex at present.

Screen resolution needs improvement as well.

I've been using it for two years.

It is stable.

It is a scalable solution.

Technical support has been helpful.

Citrix ADC is quite easy to set up, and the deployment took us about four to five days. However, if all factors are available it should take a couple of hours.

I would suggest that you use Citrix ADC, but you may need to watch out a bit for possible latency issues when you use some of their virtualization solutions. However, it's still good, compared to some other products.

I would rate Citrix ADC at seven on a scale from one to ten.

Private Cloud

We are a solution provider and when we need to implement application delivery control then Citrix ADC is one of the products that we suggest to our clients.

Manageability and visibility are good.

The interface needs to be improved because the competition is coming up with ones that are more eye-catching, straightforward, and sophisticated.

I have been working with Citrix for three years.

We are very happy with its stability.

We have no issues with scalability.

Currently, our customers for Citrix ADC are large-sized organizations.

I would rate the technical support a seven out of ten. They are okay. When they are investigating a problem then they need a lot of information, and there is a lot of back and forth.

The situation is the same with most of the big vendors.

We also deal with Fortinet FortiADC, and one of our clients recently had to switch to Fortinet because of a management decision. Importantly, however, they were still happy with Citrix.

The complexity of the initial setup and length of time for deployment depends on the customer that we're dealing with. If it's a ministry or government then it's going to take a long time. These deployments might take a month to complete. If it's a small or medium-sized customer then it might be between one and three days, and you're finished.

This product is more expensive than some of the competitors.

In the future, we are hoping to provide more cloud-based solutions. However, at this time, there is not enough maturity, and as such, corporations and government offices want on-premises solutions.

Citrix ADC is a product that I can recommend, without any doubt or hesitation.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

On-premises

We are a Citrix solution adviser and one of the main Citrix partners in Bangkok, Thailand. We use Citrix NetScaler ADC to get user access to business applications on desktop devices. 

With Citrix NetScaler ADC we can centralize desktop application management for everything.

For desktop application management, I recommend the NetScaler edition. This product is like a Swiss army knife. Citrix NetScaler ADC supports the education front-end. 

It mobilizes everything in and out, leading over bandwidth and manages all of the applications. We use it for front-end crafting.

There are a lot of features. It has to keep up with the demands of the network for complete file management. Citrix should improve the documentation. It is not really clear how to set up many features to our advantage. When we setup Citrix NetScaler ADC, we have to figure it out by ourselves without a lot of documentation. 

More than five years.

Rules configuration is the key issue for stability. We can get a lot of rule-based configuration and risk management tools with the platform.

Scalability is really cool because NetScaler isn't tied to any complexity or hard time model. It creates a delivery unit and every platform uses it.

Citrix NetScaler ADC is really flexible. We have lots of customers using it. We have banking, financial, software, themes, energy companies, etc. using it. We have from ten to 100+ clients deployed with Citrix NetScaler ADC. 

Technical support from Citrix is pretty good and they respond pretty fast, but the issue is that when we have some configurations that are problematic, they don't always know how to fix them.

When we integrate Citrix NetScaler with an app or desktop, the technical support from Citrix doesn't know how to configure NetScaler. They don't collaborate well. Their communication is sometimes lacking. They speak too fast. Overall, though, Citrix provides good support.

We started as a Citrix client at first. We used NetScaler in the very beginning. For a long time, we have only used this one product.

The installation and deployment of Citrix NetScaler ADC are easier than the competitors. It is not complex. It can be complex, but you can decide to make it not complex. 

The deployments for each project depends on customer requirements. Some take one month, others resolve in two to four months.

For the deployment of Citrix NetScaler ADC, about two or three people is enough. Wiring is simple but the hard part is the orchestration. 

We completed the integration by ourselves.

Licensing is adequate. I wanted to have a more prominent license, but until I do they don't give enough support. The additional cost would be too much. 

If NetScaler is broken, we can open tickets very quickly and request shipment for the new unit or a spare part replacement.

Citrix NetScaler already has tons of features, already too many. We want any new advanced features that they release. One thing that scares me is that with existing products, Citrix does not have detailed documentation ready before they release. Otherwise, it would be better. From my experience, when Citrix launches something new there are a lot of bugs, a lot of errors, required patches, and no documentation. You have to get help. 

Citrix needs to create better documentation. Sometimes when I enable NetScaler, it makes the box crash randomly. I have to wait for three or four release cycles to fix it. The introduction of new features from Citrix for NetScaler always has a lot of problems. 

I would rate Citrix NetScaler eight or nine out of 10. To make the product better, Citrix needs to provide full documentation for each user with video tutorials. Configuration scenarios and demos would also be helpful. We have a lot of customer demand for this better documentation and setting up Citrix NetScaler is really complicated.

We used it to manage a data center hosting environment and had more than 250 HA pairs of Citrix NetScalers (both physical and virtual) to maintain/manage customer environments. Each environment was different, each was a customer-dedicated environment.

This was a standard load-balancing solution provided to our customers. They didn't have many complaints about the way their traffic was being managed. We were able to handle specific requirements for persistence/stickiness.

Content Switching since it provides flexibility for routing traffic as desired to designated real servers. It also provides good geo capabilities through its GSLB feature.

Development team's response time could be better.

Three to five years.

No major issues with stability.

Scalability is good with the virtual appliance, where you can easily scale using the appropriate license and match up with the appropriate virtual machine.

We had a mix of makes/models, as we supported a large customer base, such as F5, Cisco CSS. We have never had a case where we had to switch NetScaler out for another make.

Initial setup is straightforward if you know basic networking concepts. It doesn't take a lot of reading to set one up.

I would rate NetScaler as a seven out of 10 for good technical support on routine issues, but any issues that needed the development team's involvement took a long time.

If you don't have very specific requirements such as the ASM that F5 offers, this would do almost all tasks as far as load-balancing is concerned (geo load-balancing as well).

There are a lot of them: 

• Load balancing in communications 
• Global load balancing between data centers 
• The management 
• Easy integration with other Citrix products. 

In the management topic, there are three levels: 

1. 1st Level, most user-friendly, the GUI, in this level we can configures all the features and inclusive test the implementations. 
2. 2nd Level Console, very helpful for easy access to all settings and troubleshooting problems, deep level in settings. 
3. 3rd Level Shell, essential to troubleshooting. Direct access to all logging in the components.

Easy integration with Citrix Solution, NetScaler has wizards to help implementation of Citrix solutions, like XenApp/XenDesktop and Xenmobile.

In the organization, we have three systems based in Citrix technology, so there was logic to add a solution which give us security and a focal point of access. With Netscaler, we have a solution divided in two data centers, a secure and unique point of access, and balanced traffic between all the critical components in the Citrix solutions. For the last, we have a mature, solid, and secure component to complete the Citrix environment.

I think there is always room for improvement in this type of solutions. For example, I think the GUI should be easy to understand.

I have used this version about one year, but Netscaler for about three years.

No, this is a Citrix product. This means there are gobs of documentation, and the support given by CItrix, it's very good.

No. We have four virtual appliances working. If we need to increase, it's a simple process.

No, the whole solution is based in Citrix technology.

The system was easy, but the GSLB function was more difficult to configure and test.

It all depends on the features that will be used and the number of accesses. 

No.

It is important, almost crucial, to have some network knowledge. Have the technical design made, it is very simple to overcomplicate when using this product.

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.

The most valuable feature is the content switching. 

ADC from Citrix has added functionalities from other products and the usability is very difficult for someone who is used to a simpler user interface, it's a little bit of a mess to use. 

In terms of the GUI's functionalities, it responds to our needs. I don't see a need for improvement for that. 

I have been using this solution for ten years. 

We have more users than before so we had to migrate from a VPX to an NPX to improve the bandwidth. We are a medium-sized company with around 5,000 users. Most of them work through ADC appliances. It responds to our needs. 

I have contacted their technical support. They're good. We have a meeting with them once a month. Their support is good. 

My recommendation would depend on the company's needs. In my former job, we used to have f5 for load balancing and we used to have NetScaler for ICA reverse proxy for access gateway and we used the two of them in conjunction. In my current job, we have Fortinet for firewalling and we have ADC for reverse proxy for access gateway. My opinion is that you have to choose the best solution for every functionality you need. 

I would rate it an eight out of ten. Not a ten because of the user interface. 

On-premises

We are using NetScaler VPX as a gateway for our virtual applications and desktops.

The most valuable feature is the securing of virtual apps and desktops.

This solution increases the backend network service performance, which is one of the things that we like the most.

Bugs in the software have had an impact on us. Better quality control or quality assurance would be an improvement.

Some of our customers have questioned the security of this solution lately, wondering whether it is safe or not, so enhancements in this respect would be good.

I have been using Citrix NetScaler VPX for seven or eight years.

Citrix NetScaler VPX is a very stable solution and it is used on a daily basis. Its use is quite crucial.

This is a scalable solution and it is easy to expand.

We have a variety of clients that range in size from small businesses to enterprise-level customers. Most of our clients are of medium size.

The technical support for this solution is pretty good.

Prior to this solution, we used F5 BIG-IP and the Azure Load Balancer.

The initial setup is simple. It takes 30 or 40 minutes to deploy.

I am a consultant and the person responsible for deploying this solution. Usually, one or two engineers are used during deployment.

The number of people required for maintenance depends on the scope of the project. I would say that two to three people are the average.

The licensing costs for this solution vary depending on which model is being used. It comes in many different sizes and models. I think that the cost of support, or maintenance, might be in addition to the standard feeds.

Our clients do evaluate other options and vendors such as F5, Cisco, Palo Alto, and Microsoft Azure before deciding on which solution to implement. People generally choose Citrix NetScaler because of the performance that it offers. Also, if they have other products by Citrix then it is generally a good idea to stay with the same vendor because of compatibility.

This is definitely a solution that I recommend.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

On-premises