Citrix NetScaler Reviews

We provide services to our customers related to Citrix ADC.

The reverse proxy for virtual apps and desktops, along with load balancing, stands out as the most valuable feature. The flexibility in configuration options is impressive.

I just hope they don't change the name again. It was challenging explaining to customers that it's no longer NetScaler but ADC, and now it's not just ADC but also the rebranding from NetScaler. When I first started working with NetScaler, it seemed a bit complex. However, with experience, I've come to appreciate its user-friendly nature, especially when you know your way around it.

I have been working with it for three years now.

I would rate its stability capabilities eight out of ten.

It offers exceptional scalability. I would rate it ten out of ten.

I've only reached out to tech support once, and they swiftly resolved my issue. I would rate it nine out of ten.

Positive

I would rate the initial setup eight out of ten.

For the specific use case that my customers primarily engage with, I would give the pricing a rating of seven out of ten. However, if you're exploring the full range of NetScaler's capabilities, my rating would drop to four out of ten.

Overall, I would rate it eight out of ten.

We have Citrix StoreFront to access everything from a remote desk. We use it with Office 365 so that we can access Teams. 

The solution is very stable.

The product is scalable. 

It would be ideal if there were more integration capabilities. That's something that could improve. 

Technical support could be improved. 

The solution could offer a higher level of security.

I've been using the solution for about five or six years. It's been a while. 

The solution has been very stable. I don't recall dealing with bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable.

The solution can scale. If a company needs to expand usage, it can do so. It's not a problem.

We currently have 400 users on the solution right now. 

I've contacted technical support in the past. Their level of service is inconsistent. Sometimes it's good and other times not as much. It depends. 

The installation was handled by a specific department and not by myself. I work in an area of the government and don't contact that department directly. Therefore, I can't speak to the overall experience of the initial setup. I can't say if it is difficult or straightforward. 

I don't have any details in relation to the pricing. It's not an aspect of the solution that I take care of. 

I'm a customer and an end-user. I don't have any special relationship with Citrix. 

I'd rate the solution at a ten out of ten. We've been very happy with its capabilities overall.

I would recommend the solution to other users, departments, and companies. 

For our VDI setup, we have two types of Citrix Netscaler solutions: one for providing application and desktop services, and another for load balancing. We sometimes face challenges like virtual appliances becoming unregistered, but we usually resolve them through checklists. Overall, Netscaler works well for load balancing in our infrastructure.

Citrix Netscaler makes it easy to provide services to end users, offering better visibility into user sessions compared to VMware. However, instability in network or machine can cause headaches as it's hard to pinpoint issues. SSL offload feature enhances security posture by providing secure connectivity between end users and backend systems. We use additional Azure remote security solutions for comprehensive protection.

Improvements are needed to address the issue of machines becoming unregistered, ensuring stability for end users. Troubleshooting with Citrix support can be challenging, so clearer diagnostics would be beneficial. As for global server load balancing, it works well on-premises, depending on user volume and service stability. Overall, it's satisfactory for us.

We have been using Citrix NetScaler for the past four years. 

The stability of Citrix Netscaler is rated at 7 out of 10. Approximately 2,000 to 2,015 users are currently using it, and we plan to increase usage. 

The scalability is considered to be good, almost 8 out of 10.

Some aspects of deploying Citrix Netscaler are straightforward, while others require professional services due to complexity. Skilled manpower and previous deployment experience are crucial. Initially, deployment required around five to six technical experts, but internalization of administration processes made it easier for us.

We handled it internally, though it took time to finalize and analyze. We didn't use third-party integrators. 

The return on investment for us with Citrix Netscaler is favorable. By centralizing user support and management, we save costs on user device procurement and resource allocation. This approach is more cost-effective compared to traditional methods.

After deployment, Citrix Netscaler shifted to a subscription-based license scheme for support, which is slightly more expensive. 

I'd rate Citrix Netscaler around 7.5 out of 10. For remote connectivity, I highly recommend it for its ease of use. As for analytics and reporting, it helps in decision-making. The main area for improvement is stability, which could be better.

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 it for web applications, firewalling, EDOS protection, load balancing, and content switching. There are quite a lot of use cases that we use it for. It just depends on what the client requires. It's a multi-purpose software.

It's a well-rounded, well-featured product that is quite flexible in terms of covering quite a lot of use cases depending on the client's environment.

It's quite a competitive solution if you compare it to others. It's one of the market leaders in terms of functionality and features.

It's a stable product.

The solution can scale.  

Technical support could be improved. 

I've used the solution for seven years or so. 

It's a stable product. I'd rate its reliability eight out of ten. There are few bugs, and it doesn't crash or freeze. 

The scalability is fine. I'd rate its ability to scale ten out of ten. 

We aren't fully satisfied with technical support at this time. We'd like them to have a faster response time. Sometimes those responding to requests aren't technical enough, and the case needs to be passed through to someone else. 

Neutral

We did not previously use a different solution. 

How long the solution takes to deploy depends on what features are deployed. The deployment of the VPN and general balancing stuff doesn't take too much time. However, if you are looking at web applications and/or firewalling, it can get a bit more complex. The implementation will take longer. 

I'd rate the ease of setup an eight out of ten. There are some complex configurations, however, it isn't something that we generally can't handle ourselves. 

The initial setup is usually done by our team. We would usually reach out to the vendor for support in the case of a bug or something like that.

I'm not involved in licensing aspects of the solution and cannot speak to the exact cost of the product. 

There is only a licensing fee. There aren't any extra costs attached.

We did not previously evaluate other options. We use Citrix a lot. It's our bread and butter. 

We're Citrix partners. 

I'm using the latest version of the solution. 

We have multiple implementations of the product, including on the cloud and on-premises. When we use the cloud version, we use Azure and AWS. 

I'd rate the product nine out of ten. 

I use Citrix NetScaler to secure and reliable access to our back-end applications hosted in our data center. With its robust features like SSL security, content switching, load balancing, and application firewalling, it streamlines traffic management and enhances overall performance while keeping our data safe from threats.

The most valuable feature for us is the application firewalling in Citrix NetScaler, ensuring only valid traffic enters our environment. Additionally, it provides insights into the origin and destination of traffic within our data center, giving us control and visibility over our network performance.

Citrix NetScaler is a robust product, but mastering it requires significant learning and training due to its complexity. While it could be easier to manage, it is like transitioning from driving a car to flying a plane – a different experience altogether. 

Additional features could include better integration with community-developed scripts and APIs, making it easier for users to access and utilize these resources. Streamlining the interface and ensuring standardization would enhance usability and provide smoother integration with third-party services.

I have been working with Citrix NetScaler for about 20 years.

I would rate Citrix stability at nine out of ten because it is solid, but many issues stem from neglecting regular maintenance. If you overlook upkeep like clearing disk space, even the best products can falter, but it is not the fault of Citrix NetScaler itself.

The scalability of Citrix NetScaler is impressive, ranging from small setups to handling gigabit-level traffic. It is designed for clustering and can sync data traffic across multiple interfaces, making it highly adaptable to varying needs. In our organization, we serve several large clients, with some deployments handling up to 7,000 users daily.

The technical support is very good.

Setting up Citrix NetScaler can vary from straightforward to complex, depending on the deployment requirements. For basic setups, it is easy, but for more intricate configurations involving clusters and firewall settings, it becomes complex and requires expertise. While there are ARM templates available for deployment, understanding your specific needs is crucial for achieving the desired outcomes.

Using Citrix NetScaler provides immense value to our organization. Its indispensable role is in facilitating remote access and managing various assets, whether on-premises, cloud, or hybrid.

Having a robust load balancer like Citrix NetScaler is essential for our infrastructure. While there are other options like F5 and Azure load balancers, NetScaler stands out with its comprehensive features beyond just basic traffic routing, offering advanced functionalities like security controls, content switching, and application firewalling.

Citrix NetScaler enhances our application delivery by intelligently directing traffic to healthy servers and services. It ensures that even if a server is up, but its services are down, traffic is rerouted to functioning servers, preventing downtime and ensuring a smooth user experience. With built-in probes, it continuously monitors the health of services, identifying issues and optimizing traffic flow accordingly.

The SSL upload feature in Citrix NetScaler has significantly improved our security by encrypting traffic and ensuring data integrity. Additionally, the global server load balancing capability allows us to efficiently host multiple services behind a single static IP address, streamlining deployment and reducing the need for multiple certificates and IP addresses.

The analytics and reporting capabilities of Citrix NetScaler have improved significantly in the past year.

For those considering Citrix NetScaler, my advice is to research its capabilities thoroughly to understand which features align with your needs. Start by experimenting with one feature at a time and learn as you go to maximize its potential for your organization.

Overall, I would rate Citrix NetScaler as a nine 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.

There are two major verticals for Citrix: VDI and NetScaler. For NetScaler, our major use cases are database load balancing, PowerVPN VPN access gateway, WAF (Web Application Firewall), and content switching. But most of them are for load balancing, access gateway, and VPN for NetScaler.

And for VDI, the major use cases are definitely securing the data and centralizing the entire infrastructure to the data center. Another major use case is publishing in-house applications for end-users who are working from home or from remote locations.

Our organization doesn't use it because we're very small. However, we have deployed the service for more than 10,000 users. Our smallest customer had 25 users, and the biggest customer had over 10,000 users.

We have eight people in the maintenance team for Citrix NetScaler, plus 24/7 customer support for day-to-day issues. They are managing multiple customers. Their expertise is at the level of RL1, three at RL2, one at L3, and one at L4.

For VDI, centralization, data protection, and data management are the most important features. As for NetScaler, its key features include a firewall, GSLB, load balancing, and an actual gateway. These are the four tiers of NetScalers.

Pricing is one area for improvement. It's on the higher side because NetScaler is a premium product used for over 70% of internet traffic worldwide. However, price is not the only concern. Manageability and adaptability can also be challenging for end customers, who may require the assistance of experts like us to deploy and manage the product effectively. Although this is good for us as partners, it can limit the product's appeal to customers who prioritize ease of use.

Moreover, having some GUI-based tools for log management and troubleshooting would be helpful and make it easier for customers to manage and troubleshoot their databases.

For the future release of Citrix NetScaler, I would like to see better pricing, as well as improved manageability and log management features.

Another thing is if a problem occurs, we have to rely on the central support system. We need to collect the log and send it back to support for analysis, and then Citrix support will provide the solution. It would be much easier to troubleshoot if something is handy, such as a web portal or a common platform where customers can upload logs and resolve some of the issues automatically.

I have been working with Citrix for over twelve or fifteen years, so I know everything about Citrix. We are using the latest update of this product.

It is a rock-solid solution, and I would rate it a ten out of ten.

It is a scalable solution. I would rate it a nine out of ten.

Previously, their support was great, especially two years ago. But these days, I'm seeing lots of slowness in providing solutions. The L1 support team is not ready, or the L2 team has a lot of work and is overburdened.

Therefore, sometimes they are very good and sometimes slow in responding, resulting in slow solution delivery.

Neutral

The deployment process is quite complex because it's a premium or tier-one product. It requires great knowledge and experience to make it easier. If you don't have the necessary knowledge and experience, you may struggle.

Moreover, the deployment process depends on the customer's requirements and priorities. If the customer is focusing on multiple options or use cases, it may take seven to ten days. But if it's a straightforward installation with only one solution, then two or three days is more than enough.

We are using both on-premises and cloud-based versions.

We have a good team of ten people in India, and we are expanding our partnerships all over the world. We have even received orders from the USA. We are focusing more and more on the interaction market and are not looking to hire any consultants or other sources. Our company is the SI (system Integrator) for the product.

It's a good investment tool. If your own organization or any other organization invests in this product, it will be useful for their product line. This product is robust and reliable, which helps customers a lot.

The cost of the product depends on the customer's requirements, so there is no fixed price. There are multiple licensing models. There are no additional costs for using this product. It comes with a support bundle, and the licensing is subscription-based. It means that you have to pay on a yearly basis.

Citrix can be quite expensive, and it can be challenging to qualify or close leads for 50 users or less than 100 users. Therefore, we are considering evaluating multiple products in parallel and finalizing one product we can pitch in our product line.

I would recommend using Citrix. Overall, I would rate it an eight out of ten because every product has room for improvement. If I rated it a nine, it means there's almost no room for improvement, which is not entirely true. So, eight is a fair rating.