NetScaler vs SolarWinds Network Topology Mapper comparison

"My customers have told me that the performance of this solution is good."

"Load balancing, cache redirection, content switching, all connected with traffic management."

"I like the monitoring ability as it enables me to identify when an internal (load-balanced) resource is having issues before it becomes a problem in production."

"The solution improves security performance."

"The MAS integration for HDX Insight has provided teams with significant visibility into network performance of the user's connection."

"The maintenance of the solution is not complex."

"This solution allows the user to easily scale out application delivery, and provides secure remote access."

"Manageability and visibility are good."

"One of the best features of SolarWinds Network Topology Mapper is that it has over 60 utility tools to utilize, so it offers a lot of different features, more than I have time to discuss at this moment, making it a good extra set of utility tools that we can incorporate onto our network."

"It's user-friendly."

"Needs configuration processes like disabling LB VIPs, automatically disabling the IPs used."

"The solution is a bit more expensive than some of the available solutions in this region. One solution in particular that I noticed was cheaper was Kemp."

"Citrix is more expensive than Horizon."

"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."

"There are certain features that are very useful and Citrix makes you pay a bit more for them."

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

"We face challenges with the solution's firmware upgrades frequently."

"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."

"This is a relatively expensive product."

"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 rate the pricing an eight out of ten since it is expensive."

"Regarding pricing, while it's expensive, I can't comment on the exact ROI without a budget analysis. However, in terms of service quality, it's worth the price."

"There isn't much of a difference between the cost of Citrix and that of other similar solutions."

"We get value for money. Its price is fair. I don't think it is overpriced."

"Price-wise, I feel that the solution is a little bit expensive."

"It is true that it is a bit pricey compared to newer technologies coming to the market. For example, A10 is a load balancer that does everything that Citrix can and it does a lot more than what NetScaler does when it comes to the security space, and their prices are so cheap. Every box comes with its own license and support built into it. When you compare that with NetScaler, you have to buy licenses separately, you have to buy a support agreement that is going to be separate. A small NetScaler, even if it is a VPX which is a virtual server, could cost you close to $150,000 to $200,000 dollars. So the pricing is really high."

"The tool is cheap."