NetScaler Reviews

We use this solution for Layer 7 load balancing for our clients, as well as single sign-on functionality, and uploading the data from their applications.

The load balancing feature of this solution is very good.

We would like the licensing model for this product to be improved, as it isn't currently very transparent. There isn't a standard package available, and each extra feature creates an additional cost.

We have been working with this solution since 2009.

We have found this solution to be stable during our time working with it.

We have found this solution to be difficult to scale out due to the complexity of the licensing model.

The technical support for this solution is good, in our experience.

Positive

The initial setup for this solution is very easy, and will require one engineer for a cloud-based deployment, or two engineers for an on-premises setup.

However, the time the implementation will take is dependent on the size and complexity of the project. Full deployment can take from three days, up to a few months for the most complicated integration requirements.

The licenses for this product are payable as a yearly subscription, and carry a high price-point. The subscription scheme is quite complicated, and costs will increase with each additional feature that is required, outside of the basic setup.

Also, if clients wish to move from an on-premises setup to the cloud-based version of the solution, the licenses are not transferable.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We use Citrix Web APP API Protection as a Firewall solution. Many ransomware attacks are happening and it is important to protect your entire data center. 

Citrix Web App API Protection allows you to enable a blocking mode. The hackers who choose to upload any unwanted data on your application, Citrix Web App will date it. A notification will be sent to you and your administrator, and that notification will include the IP address that is trying to upload some unwanted data to your application. Now you can identify and can block it, or you can block that application from that particular space in a particular country. 

We blocked that application for particular countries. We send the report to the government and they checked everything. And after a few months, we reviewed the policy.

Citrix Web App and API Protection could improve in the area of licensing.
Some customers have an enterprise license and some customers have an advanced license.  If you have an enterprise and advanced license, the Web Application Server, will not work. If you want to upgrade or if you want to use that Web Application Firewall, you have to have a premium license. I think they should enable the feature for an advanced license because small customers, cannot buy the premium license, which is a little bit expensive for them.

I have been working with Citrix Web App and API Protection for the past three years. 

The stability of the Citrix Web App and API Protection is excellent.

The scalability is not a problem.

Technical support is good when you are not able to find the Citrix documentation. They have a good resource for the Web Application Firewall. 

Positive

Citrix Web App and API Protection are definitely worth the money. You are protecting your entire application as well as your data center. If you are investing in your Web Application Firewall and API Protection, it's worth it.

The setup is very easy. The only thing is you need to understand the backend application functionality. Whether it's IES based, or whether it is some other vendors and what kind of database and authentication method they are using. This kind of information you should know before implementing the Citrix Web App and API Protection.

When talking about pricing and licensing, Citrix Web App and API Protection are in the middle.

I would rate Citrix Web App and API Protection an eight out of ten.

Citrix ADC is primarily used for load balancing exchange and other internal IT systems.

It is simple for both IT specialists and customers. With other products, we cannot leave the customer untrained. We can leave the customer during the early stages using Citrix ADC.

The stability of Citrix ADC needs to be improved.

The technical support could be improved. They do not respond or assist customers in a timely manner.

I have been working with Citrix ADC for approximately eight years.

It is typically deployed on-premises, but it is occasionally deployed on a hybrid cloud.

There have been many crashes since the last build.

Citrix ADC is easy to scale.

Technical support is different in every situation. In one case it went very well and quickly other cases it took longer.

Technical support could improve, but it is possible that my issue was complicated.

I am also working with F5, Kemp, Barracuda, Cisco, and NGINX.

Loadbalancer.org is less complex than Citrix. In some cases, our customers do not have an engineer on staff who can support this device.

These customers have a large number of Linux engineers but don't have the money. We suggested using Loadbalancer.org and other open-source tools. Many customers are of different sizes and have different budgets.

The installation is simple for both manual configuration and automatic deployment.

Our company is partners with Citrix and F5 BIG-IP.

I would rate Citrix ADC an eight out of ten.

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.

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. 

We have Citrix StoreFront to access everything from a remote desk. We use it with Office 365 so that we can access Teams. 

The solution is very stable.

The product is scalable. 

It would be ideal if there were more integration capabilities. That's something that could improve. 

Technical support could be improved. 

The solution could offer a higher level of security.

I've been using the solution for about five or six years. It's been a while. 

The solution has been very stable. I don't recall dealing with bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable.

The solution can scale. If a company needs to expand usage, it can do so. It's not a problem.

We currently have 400 users on the solution right now. 

I've contacted technical support in the past. Their level of service is inconsistent. Sometimes it's good and other times not as much. It depends. 

The installation was handled by a specific department and not by myself. I work in an area of the government and don't contact that department directly. Therefore, I can't speak to the overall experience of the initial setup. I can't say if it is difficult or straightforward. 

I don't have any details in relation to the pricing. It's not an aspect of the solution that I take care of. 

I'm a customer and an end-user. I don't have any special relationship with Citrix. 

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

I would recommend the solution to other users, departments, and companies. 

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.