We performed a comparison between Citrix NetScaler, F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM), and Loadbalancer.org based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about F5, Citrix, HAProxy and others in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC)."The solution is very stable."
"Global load balancing between data centers."
"Easy, user-friendly setup with content switching and integrated caching features."
"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."
"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."
"The solution is extremely stable."
"The MAS integration for HDX Insight has provided teams with significant visibility into network performance of the user's connection."
"I like app flows and custom flows. They integrate with multiple flows."
"The capability is at a seven or eight out of ten."
"We have found the consistency of the application always being the way it is supposed to be as its most valuable feature."
"Good application firewall."
"There is a lot of documentation available."
"F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is very easy to use, from SSL Management to enabling, disabling loads, applications, systems, and monitoring. Overall the solution keeps our application functional from a client's perspective 24 hours a day, seven days a week."
"ASM for WAF."
"The setup is pretty easy."
"One of the greatest things about F5 Load Balancer is that it provides additional capability for handling huge workloads and routing them to an SAP or non-SAP application. It is capable of supporting a large amount of user workload and application connectivity workload. This was the main reason why we chose F5."
"It helps us to route the traffic to the available servers. If we didn't have Loadbalancer we would fail to set the end-user and it would cause a failure in the cluster."
"It does what it’s supposed to do which is balancing an important intranet site we are using, so if one server dies, the second becomes active straight away."
"We now get notifications when pool members go down, and we eliminate our downtime by not sending traffic to downed pool members."
"Load balancing helps us distribute both incoming and outgoing data loads evenly among the servers, preventing overload on a single server."
"The load balancers have an easy installation and a relatively simple, easy user interface to use."
"Loadbalancer.org is less complex than Citrix."
"The performance is good."
"The support we have received from Loadbalancer.org has been good."
"Getting to use some of the advanced tools, even with the assistance of Citrix support, can be challenging."
"We have issues with the certificates. All authorization processes need certificates, however, every three months we needed to change certificates. This process iss complicated for us because Citrix does not have a not user-friendly interface and does not off user-friendly services. This needs a lot of improvement."
"There is room for improvement regarding the pricing policy for Citrix offices."
"This is an expensive solution."
"The solution could be more secure."
"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)."
"Does not include security. A web application firewall would be a nice addition."
"In every release - and it doesn't matter if it's a minor release or a major release - they keep moving things around and they keep changing the mechanism. So certain things can work in one version one way, and everything works really well, then when you upgrade it to the next version, it breaks everything because they have a new way of doing it."
"The GUI needs improvement."
"Cloud native integration should be provided."
"For integration with other AWS environments, we do some tie-ins with some autoscaling groups. This has been challenging for us. We have had issues, where when autoscaling groups scale up, there are some instances which are not showing up in the proper size. Then, those IPs would get registered with F5, but never get released. Therefore, we are ending up with a whole bunch of ghosted IPs."
"Initial setup is tricky, if you do not understand the design of this product."
"A lot of functions that are attributed to iRules can actually be simple profile changes. iRules do have a certain performance impact. Therefore, instead of writing simple iRules, they can create certain profiles for classes that will perform the same function."
"I would like there to be more device security. I would like the tool to support SSL links, along with SSL and TLS."
"There is room for improvement in the user interface."
"Bugs are the part of program and they are fixed with every release, as with any vendor."
"An area for improvement in Loadbalancer.org is that sometimes it works fine, but sometimes, it has issues. The setup for Loadbalancer.org is also complex, so that's another area for improvement."
"I would like it if Loadbalancer had the ability to make rules for specific shared bots."
"The solution can be a bit pricey."
"Possibly a more graphical overview page (with colors) to give a two second overview to see if everything is working fine."
"Originally we had some stability issues with it, so they replaced it with a new box and it's fine."
"Loadbalancer.org's complexity could be reduced."
"I would like a notification when a new version of the software is available. They told me to sign up for their newsletter, but I have not received any notification for a newer software version."
"There are many features you can set in the backend of Loadbalancer. They should simplify the configuration. The administrator should be able to configure it more simply. How it is now, you can only configure it if you have a lot of experience."
More F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) Pricing and Cost Advice →
