Associate Network Engineer at a computer software company with 11-50 employees
Real User
Top 5
2024-03-18T15:23:50Z
Mar 18, 2024
I'd suggest improved documentation integration directly within the GUI. Right now, finding comprehensive documentation often requires going to external websites like the community portal. In the APM interface itself, they could add direct hyperlinks to relevant online documentation. This would provide easy access to admin guides and other resources when working within the GUI.
In my opinion, the GUI side needs some improvement based on my usage. Sometimes, it doesn't work as efficiently as the CLI side. Feature-wise, sometimes when I log in to the GUI and want to see the pool members, and I click on that, it sometimes goes and shows me some traffic details for that specific node, inside, outside, page traffic, everything. But when I click the back arrow to go back, it takes me to a different page, not the page I was on before. So those are some of the things I think could be improved upon.
Network and Security Engineer at CITG - Continental Information and Telecom Group
Real User
Top 5
2023-10-27T18:01:21Z
Oct 27, 2023
They should work on issues related to login and access for MacOS addresses. They could provide us with direct access to edit the policies. Additionally, there need to be more features for network, portal, and VPN access. Integrating identity providers and single sign-on solutions can simplify user authentication and access control.
Learn what your peers think about F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM). Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: May 2024.
Director of consulting at a marketing services firm with 51-200 employees
Real User
Top 20
2022-06-27T21:02:05Z
Jun 27, 2022
The initial setup was complex. They could do a better job on the reporting and how we can use the data, provide more detail on the reporting logs, and show how we can export them and have graphical views. The reporting doesn't have graphical views, which makes things hard. You have basic reports that you can export, however, it's not that easy to use. The reporting needs to be improved a bit.
The solution is pretty technical. The initial setup is complex. The solution is quite costly. The solution could offer better reporting. The management aspect of the solution needs improvement.
Cyber Security Solution Architect at a tech consulting company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Real User
2020-08-19T07:57:00Z
Aug 19, 2020
Cloud services are something that F5 Access Policy Manager could do better. In the last two to three years, there has been a slight degradation in regards to their service. Another company bought them and from that point on, their service hasn't been the same. I think it's a very mature product. I have known them for more than 10 years and I have yet to witness any scenario or use case that they are not capable of handling. In order to reach more customers, their marketing could be better. They are a nice company but they are not aggressive like their main competitors; they are trying, but if they're serious, they need to focus on the cloud in order to compete with larger companies. It would be nice if they would incorporate their own SSO solution, so you don't have to use a third-party. At the same time, customers don't want to pay for a service like Cisco Duo, mostly, they just want a free token.
F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) is an access management proxy solution for managing global access to the enterprise networks, cloud providers, applications, and application programming interfaces (APIs). Through a single management interface, BIG-IP APM consolidates remote, mobile, network, virtual, and web access.
BIG-IP APM can also serve as a bridge between modern and classic authentication and authorization protocols and methods. For applications which are unable to support...
I'd suggest improved documentation integration directly within the GUI. Right now, finding comprehensive documentation often requires going to external websites like the community portal. In the APM interface itself, they could add direct hyperlinks to relevant online documentation. This would provide easy access to admin guides and other resources when working within the GUI.
In my opinion, the GUI side needs some improvement based on my usage. Sometimes, it doesn't work as efficiently as the CLI side. Feature-wise, sometimes when I log in to the GUI and want to see the pool members, and I click on that, it sometimes goes and shows me some traffic details for that specific node, inside, outside, page traffic, everything. But when I click the back arrow to go back, it takes me to a different page, not the page I was on before. So those are some of the things I think could be improved upon.
Most support teams are from other countries. We do not have knowledgeable support teams locally.
The technical support’s response time must be improved.
They should work on issues related to login and access for MacOS addresses. They could provide us with direct access to edit the policies. Additionally, there need to be more features for network, portal, and VPN access. Integrating identity providers and single sign-on solutions can simplify user authentication and access control.
The solution’s automation is not good. The solution’s GUI looks very old.
The operational deployment is not great and can be improved.
F5 BIG-IP APM disconnects when you leave it for long enough, but that is natural for IT solutions to do. That's a little bit frustrating.
The initial setup was complex. They could do a better job on the reporting and how we can use the data, provide more detail on the reporting logs, and show how we can export them and have graphical views. The reporting doesn't have graphical views, which makes things hard. You have basic reports that you can export, however, it's not that easy to use. The reporting needs to be improved a bit.
F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager has room for improvement in integration with other products.
The solution is pretty technical. The initial setup is complex. The solution is quite costly. The solution could offer better reporting. The management aspect of the solution needs improvement.
The price of this product can be improved.
Cloud services are something that F5 Access Policy Manager could do better. In the last two to three years, there has been a slight degradation in regards to their service. Another company bought them and from that point on, their service hasn't been the same. I think it's a very mature product. I have known them for more than 10 years and I have yet to witness any scenario or use case that they are not capable of handling. In order to reach more customers, their marketing could be better. They are a nice company but they are not aggressive like their main competitors; they are trying, but if they're serious, they need to focus on the cloud in order to compete with larger companies. It would be nice if they would incorporate their own SSO solution, so you don't have to use a third-party. At the same time, customers don't want to pay for a service like Cisco Duo, mostly, they just want a free token.