NetScaler Reviews

Citrix NetScaler is an Application Delivery Controller which we use to manage our gateway load balancing and web solution.

Citrix NetScaler supports our virtual appliance solutions.

Citrix NetScaler is a complete solution that is customizable, easy to configure, and has the most features.

Citrix NetScaler has stopped supporting the older versions and that has made it difficult for some of our clients. I would like to have continued support for older versions of the solution.

The vendor provides frequent patches, however, the security of the website has room for improvement.

The cost of the solution has room for improvement.

I have been using the solution for almost six years.

The solution is stable.

The solution is scalable.

The tech support is good.

Positive

The older version was complex to set up but now the solution's GUI is easy to configure.

The deployment consists of going to the storefront and configuring Citrix NetScaler on-premises.

The deployment does not take long but after the basic configuration, we have to customize based on the customer's requirements.

The implementation is completed in-house.

Our clients have seen a return on investment.

I give the price of the solution a seven out of ten.

I give the solution an eight out of ten.

The maintenance of the solution is not complex.

Citrix NetScaler is the best Application Delivery Controller on the market and I recommend it to others.

We are using Citrix ADC for SSL offloads and security, secure remote access, loads balancing, and application firewall, web application firewall.

The most valuable features of Citrix ADC are load balancing and application firewall.

Overall the price of Citrix ADC could be more competitive.

I have been using Citrix ADC for approximately 10 years.

The stability of Citrix ADC is good.

Citrix ADC is highly scalable. You can upgrade it and put increase the bandwidth or add more security features. You can start from the basic standard version, up to the Platinum version.

Citrix ADC's initial setup was simple. The full process took approximately a half-day.

We did the implementation of Citrix ADC in-house because we have the Citrix consultancy services for our customers. They utilize our services on-premise, and in-house. However, typically, the end-user customers, for private/public cloud,  have to have some deep technical knowledge. It's not for every IT person to implement. That's why the consulting team is needed to implement these kinds of solutions because they're very sensitive and high critical position in terms of application firewall, et cetera.

We have one person who handles the support of our Citrix ADC. For our customers, we use one person for their support.

Citrix ADC could improve the price and make it less expensive, other competitors have a better prices. This would allow Citrix ADC to keep dominating the market.

It is a very good solution.

I rate Citrix ADC a nine out of ten.

Our primary use cases are for the different local LANs and for exchange, a local LAN SharePoint, a local LAN for web applications and for different RDP, remote desktop publishing solutions, a local LAN for intranet, web applications, internal web applications, etc. and for all command switching and full VPN gateway for Citrix and for apps and desktops. We deal with enterprise companies, so around 5,000 users. I'm the Senior Principal IT Consultant in our organization. 

Citrix is a complete solution for those looking for an all-in-one. It's all there, the NetScaler gateway, remote access, internet access, optimization, load balancing, you have Citrix desktop publishing and VDAs. You can create a complete solution with Citrix. That's a good thing. If you have to troubleshoot something there's no problem like you would have if you were working between different solutions. If you're dealing with different manufacturers, there's always a problem with troubleshooting - nobody wants to take responsibility.

The solution has too many bugs in the software and it's always difficult when you need to update. If you have bugs in one firmware and you fix them and then update, sometimes it doesn't work in the correct way. Even when there are new feature releases, the problems are not always solved. Instability is an issue. The product also offers a lot of features that are not necessary, you don't need them. 

Bug fixing is a problem in this solution and they should consider focusing on that in any future release. 

I've been using this solution for over 10 years. 

The solution is somewhat lacking in stability. 

Scalability of the solution is fine. 

Technical support could be better. Response is good but when I open a ticket at Citrix because I have a problem, it's not because I want to check a simple configuration task on a support line, I want a solution.

I worked for a long time with F5. I've only worked with Microsoft and Cisco solutions. We're currently checking other options for a new customer. 

Initial setup is straightforward, deployment time really depends on the environment of the customer. 

I think the price is okay. 

If anyone wants to implement this solution, it's important to be clear about your use case in order to grow with the product. Functionality always depends on the underlying networking. If there is trouble in the underlying networking, then you'll always have problems with NetScaler.

I would rate this product a three out of 10. 

Internal Load Balancing and Content switching features are the main reasons for selecting this product.

Imagine providing a brand new Web service that offers persistent client-server connections, IP restriction, URL rewrite (such as remove "/assets/" path from client-side URL path), cache for CSS or JS files and requires security features to be enabled. And do not forget that this service runs on a custom port, but you must publish it using the standard HTTP port, and you only have a public IP address and it's already in use on the NetScaler. You can easily use the GUI to set up all these requirements on the same network device within 20-30 minutes. (If you do the same steps on CLI, it might take less time.)

It depends on your needs. 

• If you need PCI-compliance and have high security requirements, WAF is the most valuable feature. 
• If you need to monitor your load-balancing services with complex types of monitoring, make sure everything is alright, and load balancing is important, Content Switching and Monitoring features are the keys to your needs.
• If you want to provide a lot of static images or data, the Caching feature works best for you.

We have used all the functions. I would say the rewriting and redirection functions are must-have's for us.

We had some bugs in the previous firmware. These were not big issues, but more testing on the firmware would be key to happier customers.

We deployed NSX on our infrastructure last year. It was great, except for the standard load balancer. We were already using Netscaler MPX on our physical level and expected almost the same features from NSX load balancer. But it was really hard to even monitor the services on it, and we did not have time to wait for it to be improved. So we downloaded and tested the trial version of Netscaler VPX. We've already gotten to know the product, have made comparisons with products from other brands, but it did not take long to select it. For now, it is the best solution for us.

The primary use for using it is the wholesale application and VDIs.

I have been working the cost factors, while the performance and application are good, the factory cost brought back to you is not. Therefore, we are currently comparing the product with Microsoft RemoteApp.

The most valuable feature would be the Citrix permanent server.

It is cost-effective, if you consider the permanent server. Also, the management is easy with no downtimes. 

There are some features which are missing.

What I am looking for is something like OneDrive. We are facing an issue with OneDrive on the XenApp and XenDesktop. We can't use OneDrive with what we have. So, a fully, operational OneDrive support is what I am looking for.

Stability is good.

Scalability is good.

We like working with Citrix technical support.

I have been working with Citrix technology for the last 10 to 13 years. We have not switched solutions during this time. 

From a Citrix perspective, it was straightforward. From the application perspective, there are some tweaks that we need to do. So, we are working on those tweaks.

Currently, we are evaluating the cost prospective from the BDA cost prospective. We are evaluating Microsoft and Citrix as they are the leaders in this solution. If you compare Citrix and Microsoft RemoteApp, Citrix is the best compared to RemoteApp. RemoteApp is basically meant for a small business use case.

We are using Citrix XenApp and XenDesktop, but we are planning to now expand into the same product. 

Most important criteria when selecting a vendor: 

• Cost
• Performance
• Stability
• Scalability
• High availability.

Load Balancer and Access Gateway

Allowed secure access to authenticated user not on the network without having to download client side software

Alert Management

2 years

Minor issue setting up VeriSign Certificates

No

Not applicable - We were only setting up 4 Virtual Servers

6

We have several use cases but as an example, I have a banking customer who wants to know about their environment with Virtual Apps and Desktops. They're interested in performance, connections and network latency. The management part of Virtual Apps and Desktop is not available when you look at Citrix Cloud, it doesn't provide that information. To get more, you need to use ADM. I'm a cloud solutions architect and we are resellers of Citrix ADM.

This solution provides customers with the option to leverage all the features to gain more insight and visibility of their environment. Previously, they were always complaining about this lack of data and now performance has improved. 

I think the analytics is the most valuable feature. 

I think the interface could be better. I think some customers struggle with that. I mean, the learning curve takes a little longer than in other solutions so I think the interface and maybe training could be improved. 

I'd like to see another licensing model that could complement or be similar to licensing models of other networking solutions. It adds flexibility for the customer. 

I've been using this solution for three years. 

The solution is stable. 

The solution is scalable. My customers are usually mid-size organizations. Some small business, a few large companies. I now have a client that has close to 10,000 users.

I think Citrix has good technical support and a good escalation strategy.

The initial setup is very straightforward, very easy. Our implementation strategy is to make a personal assessment for each client and then deploy the tool and all necessary components. It doesn't take more than two hours.

Customers have looked at Ryzen or other cloud services like Amazon, Microsoft Desktop or Azure Virtual Desktops. The advantages of Citrix is that it's managed from a single interface whereas other solutions don't have that presentation or that interface. I also think that ADM and other solutions Citrix offers are very complementary to each other. 

It's important to know about other Citrix solutions, it improves the experience. Citrix improves the Virtual Apps and Desktop interface in Citrix Cloud. There are two ways to visualize or take action with the data. I think they are well on the way to being the right solution. It's very viable, they're doing a good job.

The primary use case of this solution is to serve as gateway.

The features I find most valuable are the gateway feature and the SQL load-balancing that you can do as well.

I think the documentation should be improved - there should be more documentation. In the next release, I would like to see more analytics, better dashboards, and some management monitoring tools.

Our client has been using this solution for many years now.

It is a very stable program.

I believe this solution is very scalable.

I am satisfied with the technical support.

The program is easy to install and to set up.

Citrix NetScaler VPX is not the cheapest solution out there, but you get what you pay for. There are also additional costs to the standard licensing fee.

This solution gets a ten out of ten rating from me. My advice to others is that they need to be clear of what they want to actually achieve and plan before they deploy. They should make sure that it actually meets the business requirements or the use case that they are trying to fix or sell.