Applications were particularly problematic to integrate with NGINX Plus, and because sometimes there were customers facing applications which were not integrated properly. I would rate this review an eight out of ten overall.
NGINX is a great product for anyone interested in reverse proxy. It is a reliable solution and has proven effective in my use case. I would recommend it to anyone considering similar needs. The overall product rating is ten out of ten.
I would recommend it because it's a very versatile tool for load balancing and other scenarios. For example, you can use it to host front-end applications. I would give NGINX an eight out of ten. It's great for load balancing, reverse proxying, and serving as a web server. Its versatility makes it superior to Apache in many ways. I haven't tried other similar tools, so that's why I wouldn't give it a perfect ten.
NGINX Plus greatly improved my API management and delivery. I configured multiple routes with load balancing and efficient logging, which helped troubleshoot issues effectively. While the dashboard lacked customization, the product performed well, offering about 80% similarity to NGINX open source with additional modules and support. Its scalability allowed me to upgrade server resources rather than invest in new hardware, saving costs as my traffic increased. Using load balancing with NGINX, both in the open-source version and NGINX Plus, improved service reliability. While the open-source version required manual reconfiguration if a server went down, NGINX Plus's traffic monitoring automatically detects and removes faulty servers, ensuring seamless traffic management. NGINX Plus's caching mechanism is highly effective in speeding up web content delivery. I would recommend NGINX Plus to those seeking an alternative to hardware-based load balancers. However, it is important to note that NGINX Plus is quite technical, primarily command-line-based with less emphasis on GUI. While support is available, administrators should be comfortable with technical configurations. Compared to GUI-based load balancers, NGINX Plus offers flexibility but requires more technical expertise for setup and management. Overall, I would rate NGINX Plus as a six out of ten.
Senior Manager of Operations at a comms service provider with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Dec 14, 2023
We are thinking about doing a service mesh. It's a pretty big architecture. It changes the whole front door and transactions. It will probably replace NGINX. People who want to use the solution must keep the hops to a minimum. Every technology on the infrastructure adds some latency. Keep the transaction flows to less than three hops. Hit F5, hit NGINX, and then hit the app layer. If we get too fancy, we will face additional troubleshooting burdens and latency. Overall, I rate the solution a seven out of ten.
I mainly use the cloud because it's for the Internet. But I have some cases where we need to use the solution internally or locally. But we mainly deploy the solution on the cloud. Before choosing NGINX Plus, one should ask an expert to help them. I rate NGINX Plus a ten out of ten.
IT Manager at a comms service provider with 11-50 employees
Real User
Jul 18, 2023
We used the solution on-prem, but if the customer demands it, we can deploy the solution on the cloud. NGINX is suitable for small, medium, and large enterprises. We have faced problems on NGINX that we could not figure out using the documentation, so we asked the online community for solutions. I rate NGINX a nine out of ten.
Overall, I would rate the solution a ten out of ten. If you're using a container environment, I would highly recommend it. It's usually a good fit in about 58% of cases.
I would rate this solution nine out of ten. A lot of deployments are moving to the cloud, so many people will stop buying traditional load balancers like the F5 hardware or even the F5 virtual machines. Deployment and configuration take a lot of time. NGINX is much easier to deploy and configure, and the skillset required to handle NGINX is more available in the market compared to deploying F5, Radware, or Citrix. If F5 is able to bring in more features on NGINX Plus, like an Ingress controller or something like that, we will see a lot of people going for solutions like NGINX. HAProxy is a similar solution. They aren't 100% competition, but they are good in the market. People will start moving to those kinds of solutions instead of traditional load balancing like F5 or Citrix. Once there's a lot of movement to the cloud and microservices applications, traditional load balancers will start becoming redundant.
It's worth learning Kubernetes because NGINX is generally deployed in the Kubernetes environment like ingress controller. I rate this solution eight out of 10.
Head Of Technology at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
Real User
Nov 4, 2020
I would recommend this solution. I think it works for a smaller cluster — it really depends on what your team is trying to achieve. I think it's a really good product for startup projects of medium size clusters, but once your customer base starts hitting big numbers then managing clusters becomes challenging. If you go beyond the limit, then you'll start to see a negative impact. On a scale from one to ten, I would give this solution a rating of Nine.
NGINX Plus efficiently handles heavy loads with lightweight software and simple configuration. It seamlessly integrates with F5, offering high-performance load balancing and robust reverse proxy capabilities for HTTP, IMAP, POP, and SMTP protocols.NGINX Plus stands out for its load balancing, authentication, caching, and modular design. Its flexibility and scalability make it ideal for web servers, traffic routing, and enterprise use, supported by comprehensive documentation and a strong...
Applications were particularly problematic to integrate with NGINX Plus, and because sometimes there were customers facing applications which were not integrated properly. I would rate this review an eight out of ten overall.
NGINX is a great product for anyone interested in reverse proxy. It is a reliable solution and has proven effective in my use case. I would recommend it to anyone considering similar needs. The overall product rating is ten out of ten.
I would rate the solution an eight and a half out of ten. It's important to understand the requirements before recommending its implementation.
I would recommend it because it's a very versatile tool for load balancing and other scenarios. For example, you can use it to host front-end applications. I would give NGINX an eight out of ten. It's great for load balancing, reverse proxying, and serving as a web server. Its versatility makes it superior to Apache in many ways. I haven't tried other similar tools, so that's why I wouldn't give it a perfect ten.
NGINX Plus greatly improved my API management and delivery. I configured multiple routes with load balancing and efficient logging, which helped troubleshoot issues effectively. While the dashboard lacked customization, the product performed well, offering about 80% similarity to NGINX open source with additional modules and support. Its scalability allowed me to upgrade server resources rather than invest in new hardware, saving costs as my traffic increased. Using load balancing with NGINX, both in the open-source version and NGINX Plus, improved service reliability. While the open-source version required manual reconfiguration if a server went down, NGINX Plus's traffic monitoring automatically detects and removes faulty servers, ensuring seamless traffic management. NGINX Plus's caching mechanism is highly effective in speeding up web content delivery. I would recommend NGINX Plus to those seeking an alternative to hardware-based load balancers. However, it is important to note that NGINX Plus is quite technical, primarily command-line-based with less emphasis on GUI. While support is available, administrators should be comfortable with technical configurations. Compared to GUI-based load balancers, NGINX Plus offers flexibility but requires more technical expertise for setup and management. Overall, I would rate NGINX Plus as a six out of ten.
We are thinking about doing a service mesh. It's a pretty big architecture. It changes the whole front door and transactions. It will probably replace NGINX. People who want to use the solution must keep the hops to a minimum. Every technology on the infrastructure adds some latency. Keep the transaction flows to less than three hops. Hit F5, hit NGINX, and then hit the app layer. If we get too fancy, we will face additional troubleshooting burdens and latency. Overall, I rate the solution a seven out of ten.
I mainly use the cloud because it's for the Internet. But I have some cases where we need to use the solution internally or locally. But we mainly deploy the solution on the cloud. Before choosing NGINX Plus, one should ask an expert to help them. I rate NGINX Plus a ten out of ten.
We used the solution on-prem, but if the customer demands it, we can deploy the solution on the cloud. NGINX is suitable for small, medium, and large enterprises. We have faced problems on NGINX that we could not figure out using the documentation, so we asked the online community for solutions. I rate NGINX a nine out of ten.
I would rate the solution a nine out of ten. You need to be careful with the product's configurations. It is easy to maintain.
Overall, I would rate the solution a ten out of ten. If you're using a container environment, I would highly recommend it. It's usually a good fit in about 58% of cases.
I would rate the solution a seven-point five out of ten. I would recommend the solution because of its community support.
I would rate NGINX as ten out of ten. I would recommend this solution to those who want to start using it because it's a good solution and it's free.
I rate this solution nine out of 10.
I would rate this solution nine out of ten. A lot of deployments are moving to the cloud, so many people will stop buying traditional load balancers like the F5 hardware or even the F5 virtual machines. Deployment and configuration take a lot of time. NGINX is much easier to deploy and configure, and the skillset required to handle NGINX is more available in the market compared to deploying F5, Radware, or Citrix. If F5 is able to bring in more features on NGINX Plus, like an Ingress controller or something like that, we will see a lot of people going for solutions like NGINX. HAProxy is a similar solution. They aren't 100% competition, but they are good in the market. People will start moving to those kinds of solutions instead of traditional load balancing like F5 or Citrix. Once there's a lot of movement to the cloud and microservices applications, traditional load balancers will start becoming redundant.
I’m just an end-user. I’d rate the solution a ten out of ten. I’ve been very pleased with its overall capabilities.
It's worth learning Kubernetes because NGINX is generally deployed in the Kubernetes environment like ingress controller. I rate this solution eight out of 10.
I would recommend this solution. I think it works for a smaller cluster — it really depends on what your team is trying to achieve. I think it's a really good product for startup projects of medium size clusters, but once your customer base starts hitting big numbers then managing clusters becomes challenging. If you go beyond the limit, then you'll start to see a negative impact. On a scale from one to ten, I would give this solution a rating of Nine.
It is a great product. It serves us well and is the best solution. I have been using it since 2012.