We performed a comparison between Citrix NetScaler and Radware LinkProof based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Compared to other solutions, Citrix ADC is much more robust in terms of the native integration to cloud platforms. It is far more robust from an operational point of view as well."
"If you need PCI-compliance and have high security requirements, WAF is the most valuable feature. If you need to monitor your load-balancing services with complex types of monitoring, make sure everything is alright, and load balancing is important, Content Switching and Monitoring features are the keys to your needs. If you want to provide a lot of static images or data, the Caching feature works best for you."
"It is a complete solution for those looking for an all-in-one."
"The NetScaler appliance has provided a lot of customers with greater high availability for their enterprise applications within a single site and across multiple locations."
"The most valuable features of Citrix ADC are load balancing and application firewall."
"Helped us a lot with load balancing."
"The web application firewall is one feature I found valuable in the solution."
"It has helped us to increase the resiliency of the application and the performance."
"The performance and stability are the most valuable features."
"It is a stable solution...It is a scalable solution."
"Provides good performance and scalability."
"The most valuable feature of Radware LinkProof for traffic distribution is its DNS management capability."
"The most valuable feature of Radware LinkProof is that it supports link load balance."
"We would like to see some fairly large scale improvement in the configuration process for this solution."
"There are certain features that are very useful and Citrix makes you pay a bit more for them."
"The technical support could be improved. They do not respond or assist customers in a timely manner."
"The only thing customers told me that could be improved is that they would like to be able to purchase and receive the products in one box, rather than two boxes. This is something related to marketing, though."
"We have issues with the certificates. All authorization processes need certificates, however, every three months we needed to change certificates. This process iss complicated for us because Citrix does not have a not user-friendly interface and does not off user-friendly services. This needs a lot of improvement."
"The customization has always been a key area where some improvements are required. In the beginning, everything was for customizing the outer shell of it. You had to use the command-based utility and you had to do a lot of manual work. They have improved it a little bit and now there are some GUI-based functionalities that can be used. However, more can be done that doesn't require a lot of intervention. Right now there are some features, there are some customizations that can be done, but it's still very tedious, very cumbersome, a lot of work. So that could be simplified."
"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 it 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."
"In every release - and it doesn't matter if it's a minor release or a major release - they keep moving things around and they keep changing the mechanism. So certain things can work in one version one way, and everything works really well, then when you upgrade it to the next version, it breaks everything because they have a new way of doing it."
"The solution lacks HA configuration."
"Radware LinkProof's marketing efforts need improvement to raise awareness about its capabilities and compete effectively in the market."
"There are certain features I would like to see in the next release."
"Could have more customizations on the dashboard."
"Radware LinkProof’s customer support could be improved."
Citrix NetScaler is ranked 2nd in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 85 reviews while Radware LinkProof is ranked 13th in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 5 reviews. Citrix NetScaler is rated 8.4, while Radware LinkProof is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Citrix NetScaler writes "Optimizing application delivery and ensuring robust network performance with its excellent stability and comprehensive load-balancing capabilities". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Radware LinkProof writes "Supports link load balance and has good stability". Citrix NetScaler is most compared with F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM), Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, Fortinet FortiADC, HAProxy and Loadbalancer.org, whereas Radware LinkProof is most compared with Radware Alteon, A10 Networks Thunder ADC, Fortinet FortiADC and HAProxy. See our Citrix NetScaler vs. Radware LinkProof report.
See our list of best Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) vendors.
We monitor all Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
