NetScaler Reviews

By using this solution, we are accessing our server's resources in a secure manner. It has complete end-to-end encryption, and it provides secure data access. It doesn't matter where our users are sitting or from where they are coming to our network.

It has been a very useful solution for us. It has allowed us to manage the application accessibility even during the pandemic. We have complete visibility of application accessibility and any malicious activities. We also have an analytics report. Thus, we are able to provide support for our infrastructure in a very secure manner.

Content filtering, security layer, and application customization features are the most valuable.

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.

It has been a while since I have been using this solution.

It is very stable. I would give it a nine out of ten.

It has good scalability. I would give a nine out of ten for scalability. It is up to the mark in terms of maintaining the security of my environment while upgrading the product. We have more than 1,000 users. As of now, we don't have any plans to increase its usage. We will definitely increase its usage if there is a need in the future.

Their technical support is good.

I have used other solutions, but they could not fulfill my requirement of application connectivity, printing, and other things. This solution meets my requirements, and I am happy with it.

It is a user-supportive environment. It is easy to add a new feature or platform. Our deployment was done in a phased manner, and it took us a month to complete the deployment.

Its licensing cost is much higher than other products, but it is acceptable because it is a one-time investment, and we are getting our requirements fulfilled when we buy this product. So, there is no issue with the pricing.

I would advise others to first do the assessment of the requirement. Based on the requirements and assessment, you can evaluate the product to see whether your requirements are getting fulfilled or not. Based on that only, you should go for a solution, but I'm sure if you adopt this, you will find it to be a very good solution.

By working with Citrix ADM, I have learned how to work in a mixed and seamless environment while accepting the challenge of providing seamless connectivity in a secure manner to all business users.

I would rate Citrix ADM a nine out of ten.

We are just publishing applications. We have some clients who need access to these. So, we're hosting the applications for clients. We're also publishing VDIs and using it for processing VDIs.

Citrix Director has been great. It gives us one pane of glass to be able to monitor what's going on with the user sessions as well as to keep on top of the virtual desktops, any servers that may be offline or behaving suspiciously, or any troublesome spots like disconnections. 

We also use Citrix Studio for maintaining the actual servers that are hosting these applications. We use it for delivery groups in case we need to modify delivery groups in regards to which groups have access to which applications. It has been very helpful.

We are looking for some in-depth monitoring and analytics and more information that Citrix Director doesn't provide. ControlUp has insights that not only give you an overview but also allow you to do some drill-down troubleshooting for what's going on in your environment. We are looking for some more analytical and monitoring data to be able to monitor the environment better, not only from an application standpoint but also from the standpoint of the infrastructure to everything it sits on. They can provide more data to the administrators about what's going on within the application. They can provide data not only on the application side but also about what the application sits on. They're making strides with Citrix Analytics in regards to that.

My team has been using it for at least four to five years, and I just joined this team.

It has been pretty stable. The only thing that we've ever experienced is when someone is installing a bad patch or something like that. That has usually been a user error. It wasn't the product; it was the person implementing the patch.

It is very scalable. That's another reason why our company went with Citrix. It is very scalable and versatile. If you are trying to provide to a group that doesn't necessarily need a full-fledged desktop, you can just publish out whatever application is needed. A lot of groups are very appreciative of that. A lot of groups just want to be able to get to the applications they need to do their work. They don't really want to be bogged down with a full-fledged desktop if they just need one application. Citrix gives you the capability to just do that.

You could publish it to many devices. It doesn't have to be a specific desktop. It could be a tablet as long as a person has access to the internet. You're publishing it into a portal where they can just get to that application from anywhere as long as they have maybe an RSA token, Duo, or some type of security authentication and their phone. We have users who are impressed by the fact that they can get to it. As long as they have their Citrix workspace client on their phone, they can get to wherever they need. It is very versatile in delivery.

Right now, we have about 5,000 to 6,000 onshore and offshore users. Our environment supports healthcare, so we need the ability to deliver to those users who may be working within a hospital. As long as they have an internet connection and a browser, they can access our applications. It has been a very valuable tool that allows us to present that outside our environment.

We've had to use them on occasions, and they've been very on point for the initial triaging as well as for the follow-ups. I would rate them an eight or nine out of ten. It was maybe after hours, and it took some time to get to the right engineering team for the issue. It wasn't like we were just waiting on them. It was just getting us over to the right team for a specific issue. After we actually got on the phone with an engineer, they've always been very helpful in getting the issue resolved.

It is pretty straightforward.

I would advise others to just go through and look at the requirements and the needs of the people you're supporting. I will always recommend doing a POC, just to make sure that the product that you're inquiring about or thinking about purchasing does what it says it does because you don't want to be oversold something and it under-delivers. I will always recommend doing some type of POC to test everything out. If it is in your budget, then I would say go with it.

It has improved the way our organization functions. I have been very impressed with the direction in which Citrix is going. I got introduced to Workspace last year, and I attended the virtual SYNERGY conference. It was very impressive to see so many upcoming things that Citrix is working on. I noticed that VMware also has its version of Workspace, so I guess that's the new hot terminology to use. The Citrix solution is called Workspace, and the VMware solution is called Workspace ONE.

I would rate Citrix ADC a nine out of ten. There's always room for improvement for any application. That's why they have different versions or a series of applications.

We basically use it for money transactions, important call centers, and cash centers.

Its flexibility, agility, and robustness are the most valuable. Its management and implementation are also quite easy.

Citrix ADC can be really complex. It isn't very simple like some other appliances that I've worked with. You need a lot of skill and experience to manage it. I'm not talking about a year or two. You need at least four years to understand it very well. It is not that easy to learn. They should make it a lot simpler for users to understand the management of it. They can also provide some additional training. The material they have on the site is not sufficient enough for you to understand how to manage it. Their training is expensive, and not everyone has the funds and experience for it.

Citrix isn't very popular around these parts of the world. So, it can use some more marketing, sales, enlightenment, and advertisement. These could bring more market for them. Basically, there are just a few companies that really go for Citrix. Most of the companies go for VMware because they marketed themselves more than Citrix. There isn't much difference between Citrix and VMware. VMware is a little more robust than Citrix. Citrix has focused more on desktops rather than server virtualization, and that's the advantage VMware has over Citrix.

Citrix also needs to educate and inform users about the infrastructure that is supported with a version. Currently, if the customers don't look at the datasheet, they might miss this important information.

I have been using this solution for four years.

If you don't go and search for information in the datasheet and confirm which infrastructure is compatible with Citrix, it might blow up in your face. Citrix needs to work on this. They need to educate more and put more data to inform that not all infrastructure can go with this version of Citrix. 

It is highly scalable. We have 1,000 users currently, and we have plans to increase its usage.

I am not sure if we have technical support from Citrix. If your version is out of date, you do not get any support from Citrix, even if you've been a loyal customer for a decade. That's a loophole, and there is no grace period for their licenses once they're expired. They should work on that and at least give you a grace period of 90 days or 60 days prior to renewing your licenses with them. We had some problems not long ago and needed their support, but because of the version we were running back then, they denied any support, and we ran into some productivity problems and service downtime as a whole.

For me, it is easy, but other people might see it as complex.

It is very pricey, but we get it. If you need the best, money shouldn't be a problem.

You need to understand the infrastructure first before delving into it. If you don't have proper knowledge about it, you might run into problems while managing it. Not everyone has the skill to manage Citrix ADC. So, I advise everyone to get proper training and education before implementing it. It is very important.

I would rate Citrix ADC a nine out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for load balancing and SSL offloading. It's mostly for load balancing, however, occasionally we use it for the SSL offloading and content switching.

The load balancing on the solution is excellent.

The fact that you can do content switching is very useful.

The pricing is pretty good.

The solution is easy to work with and manage.

It's cloud-ready and we can manage it both on-premises and on the cloud if we need to.

The multi-tenancy isn't ideal.

The solution should be able to scale more effectively than it does.

Technical support could be improved upon.

Recently, we tried to configure AAA authentification and we ran into some issues using the web-based GUI. When you are on the console it works, however, when you're on the web-based version when you log in with your AAA credentials, it's very very slow. That is something that we're beginning to see and something they need to address.

We've been using the solution for over six years at this point.

The stability is okay. We haven't dealt with any bugs at all.

A big requirement for us is to be able to scale for multi-tenancy, and this solution doesn't really provide for that. We're looking into another model that might be able to help us handle this.

The technical support is okay. However, they could still improve their services.

I've worked with F5 and found it hard to work with and manage, in comparison to Citrix.

The initial setup was pretty straightforward. I wouldn't say that it was tedious due to the fact that the vendor who we got to assist us already had experience in deployment. They made it pretty easy. After the POC it was simple to deploy into the production environment.

We have less than 20 engineers that are working with and maintaining the product.

Our vendor helped us deploy the solution. They made the process pretty efficient and we were satisfied with eh results.

The solution offers quite good value for money. For the amount you pay, you get a fairly robust product.

We're just customers.

I would recommend this solution to other organizations as it's quite easy to use. There's so much that you can do, compared to F5, for example. With F5, you have to do a lot of tweaking to be able to achieve certain things. 

With Citrix, due to the infrastructure, we run very very easily. We run on ECA infrastructure and it's a great thing. It's very very straightforward. With F5, it's not as good. 

That said, it has some flaws that need to be corrected.

On a scale of one to ten, I would rate it at an 8.

From a NetScaler perspective, in terms of LTM, not GSLB, NetScasler has performed very well. In comparison to F5, it holds its own.

For some of my deployments, NetScaler has been strictly a replacement to get something new in. It was cheaper than F5. We took a chance on it. The return on investment is the fact that we spent less money on it. It does do its job and it holds well against F5.

I can turn on features without actually owning a license. I can test them out, I can use them for a while, and then I can be licensed up. That's awesome. I don't have to have a license immediately before I can start to deploy things rapidly, rapid deployment is a plus.

When I compare it to F5 from a hardware or software perspective, they both have their glitches. From a software perspective, either one is not without code bugs.

From an SDX perspective, having the ability to spin up a VPX, the way we spin up our regular features, quickly and have a 60-day trial while we spin up VPXs will give us the opportunity to do more proof of concept work quickly without having to buy the license and download the VPX. A feature like this would be helpful. 

I would also like to have video tutorials so that when you click the help link, you have the option to go to the Citrix forum and get information and help from other people and other users. Something that points you out to a tutorial video link that is a general overview. 

I liked the fact that is NetScaler out-of-the-box is intuitive. You can catch on fairly quickly. Especially when you're doing an advanced alert. You cannot do a re-direct quickly without going through some documentation and if nobody's done it before, they don't know what you're talking about. That is when a help link would be useful that could direct you to the right tutorial video and then it could point you directly after that video to further direction and explanation. Straight to the meat of things. Something like a quick video tip tutorial would be great. Whereas if you're an F5 customer, you don't get something like this and you do have DevCentral that you can go to get information, but it requires you to read through many documents and comb through trying to configure something that is complex. They should deliver the information quickly to end users to make it even faster and more efficient to deliver our own applications and services to customers.

Video files can be large, they don't necessarily have to be on the box itself, but even through a link that quickly goes to their website or YouTube, whatever platform, could work. 

I would like to see them make it easier to do some of the more complex things. For example, a web re-direct requires two pieces to it. You have two ports and when people want to go to a web page, they just type in the webpage that on the backend will redirect them to a secure link. The initial setup of that is cumbersome because you have to do it twice. There are things that can be replicated. The IP address, for example, is the same. This change would go a long way. Don't make me do it twice and don't make me have to read tons of documentation to figure out how to do it. Ease of configuration for some of the more complex processes would be a good improvement. 

It has high stability. I deployed these in hospitals where lives matter. The contention was whether or not to go with F5 because it's the leader in the marketplace and they have 70% of the market shares. Even though NetScaler is big, it still doesn't hold the fair market share. NetScaler is the underdog but it is very stable. I've seen it in hospital environments where lives matter, it's held its own, it does what it says it's going to do and it does it well. It's certainly a top contender, if not an equal contender with its counterpart, F5. 

Scalability is very impressive. The way it works is that you can collapse everything on to a couple of platforms, small, medium, and large. The small one is obviously an initial buy-in. The mid one is fairly powerful and is bigger than an 8920. You are limited on the hardware. You get 64 and you get 32 out of the box, which is what you paid for but you can license up the 64. On the other platform, you can start off at 32 with the initial buy-in and then license up from there for a max of around 256 gig. The way they have it is that you are locked in from a hardware perspective.

Their technical support is decent. It could use some improvement. Help desks and technical support are good but you can tell that there's been turnover. We'll have complex issues that we're trying to work through and we would like somebody who's more experienced and not somebody who had just gone through training. Employee retention on the help desk would go a long way. 

NetScaler does the same thing as an F5 and it's cheaper.

There was some trepidation regarding the initial setup because it's new equipment and nobody has had training for it. We were able to figure it out and stand it up. It took some reading and some calls to tech support, but they were helpful when we were first setting it up.

There are the regular license costs and you also have to pay for licenses if you want more DPXs or whatever. A standard DPX is fairly cheap. It's around $7,000. 

I would rate it an eight out of ten because nobody is a ten. I would give it a nine if it was a little easier to pick up. Out of the box it's easy. Anybody who's an engineer can usually pick it up or if they've had previous load balancing experience, it's easy. Obviously, not everybody has that kind of experience. 

Not many of our customers use the solution's web application firewall. We use the solution's IP Reputation and bot protection features. We use the solution mostly as Citrix and Gateway ICA proxy and load balancing. There are a lot of changes with the solution, but Citrix NetScaler has quite a comprehensive portfolio of training courses.

The licensing model and technical support of the solution could be improved. The exchange rate with the local currency contributes a lot to why some of our customers are looking at alternatives.

I have been working with Citrix NetScaler since it first came onto the market. I have been using the solution before the Gateway feature was a part of NetScaler, and it was a stand-alone product. I have been using the solution since Citrix acquired the product.

Citrix NetScaler is a scalable solution.

Citrix NetScaler has many features. The solution's basic features, like load balancing and Gateway, are pretty easy to use. It becomes complicated very, very quickly in large environments because it has many features. I would recommend the solution to other users.

There are much cheaper alternatives if you just need the solution for basic load balancing. There are no alternatives to Citrix NetScaler if you want to use it as a Gateway and access it from the public network. Integrating Citrix NetScaler with the existing infrastructure and applications is pretty straightforward once you get the hang of things.

Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

I use Citrix NetScaler as a gateway to provide secure access to virtualized desktops and applications.

Citrix NetScaler offers robust security features, including SmartAccess and customizable policies, making it a reliable choice for safeguarding user data. The seamless integration with Citrix tools enhances both performance and security, creating a powerful combination for optimal IT environments.

There is room for improvement regarding the pricing policy for Citrix offices. In the past, the gateway was cost-effective, but there has been a shift, and the current pricing seems too high.

I have been working with Citrix NetScaler for many years.

I would rate the stability of the solution as a seven out of ten.

I would rate the scalability of the solution as an eight out of ten.

Tech support for NetScaler can be frustrating. When opening a case, I often spend much time with first-level support, who sometimes lack programming knowledge. The process involves repeating details when the case is escalated to an engineer which causes delays. Overall, I would rate the support as a three out of ten.

Neutral

Before using Citrix NetScaler, I had experience with similar products. I recall working with Citrix Gateway for server access, but it involved a server running an application on a Windows server. I have also dabbled a bit with other vendors like F5 for feature integration. However, integrating with Citrix has been challenging as they are not very open to external integrations.

The solution is quite expensive. Regular security audits reveal frequent vulnerabilities, requiring monthly patches.

Overall, I would rate Citrix NetScaler as a seven out of ten.

We use the product for load balancing and as a reverse proxy solution.

The tool's pricing is a pain point since we have many cheaper alternatives. 

I have been working with the solution for five years. 

I rate Citrix ADM's stability a nine out of ten. 

I rate the tool's scalability a seven out of ten. 

Citrix ADM has a good tech support. 

Neutral

I rate the solution's deployment an eight out of ten, and was straightforward. It was completed in three weeks. 

Our customers are mostly medium enterprises. 

I rate the tool's pricing an eight out of ten. 

I rate Citrix ADM a seven out of ten.