NetScaler Reviews

Our primary use case for the product is server load balancing, specifically the application level.

We are able to offer more support to our customers.

The most valuable feature is the capability of performing load balancing in a virtual environment.

They need to implement and integrate security solutions. Specifically, a web application firewall.

I would give this solution nine out of ten for stability. It is not perfect because at times I was faced with an issue where the application was getting a lot more traffic than is desirable, and I can see Citrix having issues with this.

We have close to fourteen hundred clients using this solution. We expect this to increase, but it is dependent on clients' needs in terms of load balancing.

Some of our clients use the F5 load balancing solution, but that is only ten to fifteen of approximately fourteen hundred clients.

It is a pretty easy setup. You don't need to change anything related to your IT configuration, MAC addresses, or switching tables.

We implement this solution for our clients. We use a template based approach, so normally it can be deployed in a fraction of minutes. One person is sufficient for the deployment and maintenance of this product.

I recommend this product to customers because they have a ninety day free-trial period. This is a good solution for people who also have a budget constraint.

We have a five year platinum licensing agreement, which does not incur additional costs of any kind.

I would rate this product 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 are a solution provider and when we need to implement application delivery control then Citrix ADC is one of the products that we suggest to our clients.

Manageability and visibility are good.

The interface needs to be improved because the competition is coming up with ones that are more eye-catching, straightforward, and sophisticated.

I have been working with Citrix for three years.

We are very happy with its stability.

We have no issues with scalability.

Currently, our customers for Citrix ADC are large-sized organizations.

I would rate the technical support a seven out of ten. They are okay. When they are investigating a problem then they need a lot of information, and there is a lot of back and forth.

The situation is the same with most of the big vendors.

We also deal with Fortinet FortiADC, and one of our clients recently had to switch to Fortinet because of a management decision. Importantly, however, they were still happy with Citrix.

The complexity of the initial setup and length of time for deployment depends on the customer that we're dealing with. If it's a ministry or government then it's going to take a long time. These deployments might take a month to complete. If it's a small or medium-sized customer then it might be between one and three days, and you're finished.

This product is more expensive than some of the competitors.

In the future, we are hoping to provide more cloud-based solutions. However, at this time, there is not enough maturity, and as such, corporations and government offices want on-premises solutions.

Citrix ADC is a product that I can recommend, without any doubt or hesitation.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

We have one project for our telecom and another for our port to manage traffic.

In our country, it is not possible to implement in the cloud.

• Loadbalancing
• It has disaster recovery functionalities.

We are working the Oracle to publish all the web applications on the platform in the next phase of the application. This will be good for us because there are additional security features added into the platform from the website.

The reporting is not so good. They don't have an application to connect the logs.

The stability is good. If there is a problem, the load will be shifted to other sites automatically, which has been a good experience for us.

It is working now at two sites.

The technical support is fine. I would rate the technical support as a five (out of five). They gave us extra support during the deployment phase.

We used the documentation to deploy it. 

When we deploy the product, we also buy the Professional Services from Citrix. Another engineer and I also worked on these products.

We have all the features and functions of Citrix because we have a premium license.

For partners, NetScaler is not as expensive price-wise versus F5. The biggest difference between NetScaler and F5 is the support. F5 has better support, and it is important to have good support. I have recommended to NetScaler that they improve their support.

NetScaler is a good product for partners.

I would rate NetScaler as an eight (out of 10).

We are a Citrix solution adviser and one of the main Citrix partners in Bangkok, Thailand. We use Citrix NetScaler ADC to get user access to business applications on desktop devices. 

With Citrix NetScaler ADC we can centralize desktop application management for everything.

For desktop application management, I recommend the NetScaler edition. This product is like a Swiss army knife. Citrix NetScaler ADC supports the education front-end. 

It mobilizes everything in and out, leading over bandwidth and manages all of the applications. We use it for front-end crafting.

There are a lot of features. It has to keep up with the demands of the network for complete file management. Citrix should improve the documentation. It is not really clear how to set up many features to our advantage. When we setup Citrix NetScaler ADC, we have to figure it out by ourselves without a lot of documentation. 

More than five years.

Rules configuration is the key issue for stability. We can get a lot of rule-based configuration and risk management tools with the platform.

Scalability is really cool because NetScaler isn't tied to any complexity or hard time model. It creates a delivery unit and every platform uses it.

Citrix NetScaler ADC is really flexible. We have lots of customers using it. We have banking, financial, software, themes, energy companies, etc. using it. We have from ten to 100+ clients deployed with Citrix NetScaler ADC. 

Technical support from Citrix is pretty good and they respond pretty fast, but the issue is that when we have some configurations that are problematic, they don't always know how to fix them.

When we integrate Citrix NetScaler with an app or desktop, the technical support from Citrix doesn't know how to configure NetScaler. They don't collaborate well. Their communication is sometimes lacking. They speak too fast. Overall, though, Citrix provides good support.

We started as a Citrix client at first. We used NetScaler in the very beginning. For a long time, we have only used this one product.

The installation and deployment of Citrix NetScaler ADC are easier than the competitors. It is not complex. It can be complex, but you can decide to make it not complex. 

The deployments for each project depends on customer requirements. Some take one month, others resolve in two to four months.

For the deployment of Citrix NetScaler ADC, about two or three people is enough. Wiring is simple but the hard part is the orchestration. 

We completed the integration by ourselves.

Licensing is adequate. I wanted to have a more prominent license, but until I do they don't give enough support. The additional cost would be too much. 

If NetScaler is broken, we can open tickets very quickly and request shipment for the new unit or a spare part replacement.

Citrix NetScaler already has tons of features, already too many. We want any new advanced features that they release. One thing that scares me is that with existing products, Citrix does not have detailed documentation ready before they release. Otherwise, it would be better. From my experience, when Citrix launches something new there are a lot of bugs, a lot of errors, required patches, and no documentation. You have to get help. 

Citrix needs to create better documentation. Sometimes when I enable NetScaler, it makes the box crash randomly. I have to wait for three or four release cycles to fix it. The introduction of new features from Citrix for NetScaler always has a lot of problems. 

I would rate Citrix NetScaler eight or nine out of 10. To make the product better, Citrix needs to provide full documentation for each user with video tutorials. Configuration scenarios and demos would also be helpful. We have a lot of customer demand for this better documentation and setting up Citrix NetScaler is really complicated.

There are a lot of them: 

• Load balancing in communications 
• Global load balancing between data centers 
• The management 
• Easy integration with other Citrix products. 

In the management topic, there are three levels: 

1. 1st Level, most user-friendly, the GUI, in this level we can configures all the features and inclusive test the implementations. 
2. 2nd Level Console, very helpful for easy access to all settings and troubleshooting problems, deep level in settings. 
3. 3rd Level Shell, essential to troubleshooting. Direct access to all logging in the components.

Easy integration with Citrix Solution, NetScaler has wizards to help implementation of Citrix solutions, like XenApp/XenDesktop and Xenmobile.

In the organization, we have three systems based in Citrix technology, so there was logic to add a solution which give us security and a focal point of access. With Netscaler, we have a solution divided in two data centers, a secure and unique point of access, and balanced traffic between all the critical components in the Citrix solutions. For the last, we have a mature, solid, and secure component to complete the Citrix environment.

I think there is always room for improvement in this type of solutions. For example, I think the GUI should be easy to understand.

I have used this version about one year, but Netscaler for about three years.

No, this is a Citrix product. This means there are gobs of documentation, and the support given by CItrix, it's very good.

No. We have four virtual appliances working. If we need to increase, it's a simple process.

No, the whole solution is based in Citrix technology.

The system was easy, but the GSLB function was more difficult to configure and test.

It all depends on the features that will be used and the number of accesses. 

No.

It is important, almost crucial, to have some network knowledge. Have the technical design made, it is very simple to overcomplicate when using this product.

I use Citrix NetScaler in my company for mostly two-factor authentication.

The most valuable feature of the solution is the two-factor authentication.

From an improvement perspective, the tool should be made easier in the area of the configuration capabilities that it provides to users. Currently, it is not easy to use the configuration capabilities of the product.

I have been using Citrix NetScaler for a month. I use the solution's latest version.

It is a very stable solution. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

It is a scalable solution. Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

Around 100 employees in my company use the product.

The product's initial setup phase was easy.

I did not do the product's installation. My colleagues managed the product's installation phase.

The solution is deployed on an on-premises model.

I don't know about the maintenance part of the solution since the server we use in our company is operated from some other location.

The global server load balancing feature of Citrix NetScaler has improved our company's application availability.

I can recommend the product to those who plan to use it.

I rate the overall tool a nine out of ten.

The primary use case is a low balancing geo failover. However, there are a lot of use cases that we use it for.

We use it for Citrix NetScaler MPX deployments. It is being used for publishing Citrix XenApp, mostly for load balancing, but we have been evaluating solutions for deploying it in multi-data centers. 

• Global servers
• Load balancing

We need multi-site and DNS failover.

It is difficult to customize. It is more difficult to customize than F5, for example. They have custom iRules that you can write for customized situations. 

I would like to see more integration for single sign-on on the Citrix side. F5 has done a lot of work on single sign-on capabilities, and it seems that NetScaler might be lacking a bit compared to F5.

We have had very good luck with stability. However, we have always deployed in an HA configuration.

Scalability is great. One of the best features of NetScaler is that it can scale out.

Technical support seems very knowledgeable if we have any problems. Support had been good when we needed it. We have not needed it that much, but they are good to work with.

We used Windows Network Low Balancing.

We had a consulting service help us with the setup.

We have been evaluating F5, Citrix, and other ADC products. Citrix is the most expense of all of them.

You need to have somebody who understands application delivery controllers and all their features. If you don't have someone, I would highly recommend training in professional services to help out with it.

We are sort of in the evaluation process of replacing everything with one solution.