NetScaler Reviews

The primary use case is for troubleshooting how users are experiencing the Citrix environment.

The most valuable features are for the ADMs and the overall monitoring environment.

I would like to see the virtual and desktop license included in the pricing.

I have been working with Citrix ADM for a number of years.

I have found the scalability to be acceptable.

The initial setup was straightforward and simple. The installation took about an hour.

I did the installation in-house.

The pricing could be lower. The actual device itself is included in the license, so the fact that you have to license virtual machines on it is the price point that could be lower.

I would rate Citrix ADM an eight on a scale of one to ten.

It has many use cases. It is used for the high availability of the service and for connecting local sites or geolocation sites called GSNP. 

We are selling all of its models. Citrix ADC can be deployed on the cloud or on-premises.

Citrix ADC has increased the productivity of the staff by keeping all the applications available all the time.

It also increased the security of the online application by enabling the web application firewall feature.

With the amazing scalability features of the Citric ADC, we have been able to save money.

High availability, performance, scalability, and security are the main pillars. It enhances the security for accessing the applications.

It is very user-friendly, and it works fine. The management of the device is very easy from a technical perspective.

It does not have a sandbox cloud service and antivirus. It should have on-prem or cloud sandboxing and antivirus.

I have been using this solution for five years.

It is stable.

It is scalable.

They have awesome support. I can give them a four and a half out of five.

Positive

It has a medium level of complexity. It is not complex, and it is also not that easy.

Its price is comparable to others and affordable.

I would advise doing proper sizing and proper configuration to get the maximum benefits of this solution.

I would rate Citrix ADC an eight out of ten. Everything is very good in this solution.

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.

This solution acts as my web server, web application server, firewall, and load balancer. I also use it for IPSec 4 to IPSec 6 conversion.

The most valuable feature is load balancing. This solution will do both global and local load balancing.

The WAF features are very helpful.

The WAF component needs to be simplified so that it is easier to use.

In the next release, I would like to see more firewall policy support.

I have been using Citrix NetScaler VPX for about five years.

There are a few bugs here and there, but technical support has been able to assist with them.

This solution is easy to scale if we have up to ten servers, but much higher and we need to use a different level of license. It is a little bit expensive.

We have approximately 2,000 users.

I am quite satisfied with the technical support.

We did not use another solution prior to this one.

The initial setup is straightforward.

I installed this solution with the help of my own team.

Our licensing fees including technical support are approximately $3,500 USD.

We evaluated a solution by F5, but we found it to be a little complex and we didn't proceed with it.

My advice for anybody who is considering this product is that it works best for small-scale industry. I would recommend this for a small business, but not for larger organizations. It works quite well for 1,000 or 2,000 users, but I would not recommend more than that.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

I like app flows and custom flows. They integrate with multiple flows.

Citrix ADC is a complex product, and it takes time to understand these things. But the documentation is poor, and the deployment is difficult. Integration could also be better because what I find is that you cannot easily integrate the panel in the second sector. What I have found is that in the last index, there is a limitation when getting validated. Technical support could also be better.

I have been working with Citrix ADC for about six months.

My impression is that they are okay but have room for improvement. Technical support is not excellent, but not that bad either. In some cases, in some calls, we got the answer upfront, or one was given later. But most of the time, we have to do a follow-up call.

The initial setup was complex for me.

I would recommend this solution to potential users because most are working from home in today's scenario. 

On a scale from one to ten, I would give Citrix ADC a seven.

We use this solution for screening access, so certain people have access to certain applications. It's a good solution to deliver applications to users who are located in geographically distinct locations. The product means you can have control and still deliver the applications. We have a partnership with Citrix and I'm technology vice president. 

I like that the solution can be made available on any device and can be accessed on a wide area network - it allows for better performance for technology applications.

The process itself could be improved by making it more flexible because it has become really complicated to deploy. Implementing the application delivery mechanism model system has become more difficult over time and more complicated to handle.

I would like to see a simplification of initials. 

I've been using this solution for a very long time, since it was first established. 

It's a stable solution. 

It's a scalable solution. 

Technical support is average, sometimes response times are a little slow.

Deployment takes quite a lot of planning and the cost of implementation is based on the number of users. You need to have clarity about the architecture to get an idea of how long deployment will take.  

If a company wants to have a secure environment and they want the performance then this is a good solution.

I would rate this solution a nine out of 10. 

The primary use of this solution is application delivery. It provides access.

This solution is a gateway to the public cloud.

The most valuable feature of this solution is that it is very light. Once you log in, you have your applications delivered. It is not heavy over the internet or the web.

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

I would like to see multifactor authentication added to this solution to improve the security.

In terms of stability, this solution is quite good.

There are some things that I am not fully clear about when it comes to the physical appliance because I have not used it before. Currently, I am using the virtual appliance and it is scalable.

We have approximately one hundred users. We have no plans to increase usage at this time.

My consultant handles the first level of technical support for me.

I have not tried other solutions.

The initial setup of this solution is not complex. I think that it's quite simple.

The deployment takes approximately one or two days.

I have a consultant who handles the deployment of this solution for me.

We have the option of configuring the workspace or the receiver for clients to connect, or they can use the URL option and then login. I prefer using the URL that is on the web.

This is a solution that I have used for years and I recommend it.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We used it mainly for GSLB (Global Server Load Balancing). It was the intelligent DNS service.

I found that the GUI was very easy to to navigate. If you were looking for something, it was fairly easy to find. There's a lot of third-party documentation and information available online as well.

Citrix should offer a demo or free-trial version of NetScaler. Several other vendors do, but Citrix does not.

Pricing should also be more readily available.

We deployed Citrix NetScaler in 2018, and I've worked with it for four years.

In the four years I was working on it, we didn't have a single incident. There were no crashes or abnormal behavior. We found it to be very stable.

We didn't have any issues with scalability.

I've contacted technical support once, and their response was timely. There were no issues.

I found the initial setup to be very easy.

Citrix NetScaler's pricing is slightly above average but not overly expensive. I would consider F5 BIG IP to be the most expensive, Citrix NetScaler to be the second most expensive, and then Kemp Load Balancer to be the third.

I am really happy with Citrix NetScaler in terms of the stability and user-friendliness of the user interface. It's easy to set up as well, and I'd rate it at nine out of ten.