Citrix NetScaler Reviews

We have published our applications via Citrix and then given access to the business users to access those specific applications via Citrix. We have many applications where multiple users need access - whether it's an EVS or a CRM, all these have been published to Citrix. We also use the solution for the ADC. ADC is a front end, wherein I get queries, and we'll get all the requests from internal and external users as well.

The solution is easy to use. It's very easy to configure. The solution is not very difficult.

Performance-wise it's okay. The solution is stable. 

The solution is easy to set up and the deployment process is quite fast.

The solution could be more secure. 

I've used the solution for four or maybe five years.

The solution is quite stable and the performance is good. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable. The stability is good.

We have about 3,000 users on this solution. The product can scale. 

We are in constant touch with Citrix support. We get a good resolution from them. I'd say that we are quite satisfied with the level of support they provide. 

I also worked with F5. We used it for a couple of years.

The setup process is not overly complex or difficult. The installation should not take more than three to five hours so long as you have the right information on hand. 

Since the solution is straightforward and stable, we only need three or four engineers to handle deployment and maintenance. 

We handled the installation ourselves. We did not need outside help from consultants or integrators. We're capable of handling everything in-house.

There is a licensing fee, and we pay it once a year.

We're a customer and an end-user.

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

I would recommend the solution to others. 

Our primary use case is the hosting and delivering of web applications.

The product has helped us a lot with load balancing because we had limited experience with it.

The most valuable feature is the management and application delivery for Layer 7 traffic.

At the current time, the solution is not missing any features that I would like to have implemented.

This is a stable product that we have used since 2014.

This solution is scalable, and the sizing is defined by the amount of traffic. Our first box supports up to five hundred megabits of traffic, whereas our second box supports traffic of five gigabits. We will consider making use of this solution in any project going forward.

We have a contract with the re-seller, who has good expertise. If they cannot fix the issue then they escalate it to Citrix, where the tickets are usually solved. Sometimes this takes a little longer because of the multilevel ticket priority. Ideally, it should be possible for the re-seller to assign it directly to level three.

Prior to this, we used the Cisco ACE solution until the product was discontinued.

The initial setup was a little complex. We needed to choose the right partner to assist us with setup and implementation.

We contracted our re-seller to help with installation and setup. The deployment took approximately one month.

We have a yearly licencing fee, and there are no additional costs.

We used Cisco ACE, and they were the ones who recommended that we switch to this solution. We took their advice and we are pleased with it.

Customers need to look to the future and purchase the right model for their necessities. A new license can be purchased, rather than additional boxes.

I would rate this solution nine out of ten.

I use the solution for its access gateway and endpoint management features to balance services.

The solution's most valuable features are low latency, reverse proxy, content switching, and access gateway.

We face challenges with the solution's firmware upgrades frequently. They should improve this particular area. 

I have been using the solution for nine years.

I rate the solution's stability as an eight. 

It is a very scalable solution. 

The solution's technical support team is good.

The solution's initial setup was straightforward. The deployment takes only a few hours. I rate the process a ten out of ten.

It is an enterprise solution. Thus, its costs are reasonable.

I recommend the solution to others and rate it as a ten. 

There's a very powerful content switching capability, load balancing capability, and SSL offloading, layer-to-firewall capabilities, routine capabilities, policies, and rewrite policy capabilities. So there are a lot of capabilities in this solution.

The most valuable feature is SSL offloading.

The solution can improve their support and send tickets directly to a Citrix ADC engineer in order to avoid having to escalate each support call.

I have been using the solution for 20 years.

The solution is extremely stable.

The solution is scalable.

I think that the solution needs to be handled by a team of Citrix ADC engineers, not just a normal support desk. Every single time you log a support call, it has to be escalated anyway, so why not just give us direct access to the Citrix ADC engineers?

Neutral

The initial setup is straightforward with some training. You can get the solution up and running out of the box, but training does help. Deployment can be completed in three days if you have all the bits and pieces in place. We use three technical engineers for deployment.

The deployment was completed in-house.

You can do CapEx and then a yearly monthly fee, or you can do a subscription model, whether that's one month, month-to-month, or three-year subscription model. I give the solution an eight out of ten for pricing.

I give the solution a nine out of ten.

We currently have 40 - 45 people using the solution.

I recommend using an integrator that knows what they're doing. You need to validate the integrator's capabilities.

I think it's a really, really solid, well-run, nice solution.

• Load Balancing: Why? Availability/Performance: Those are the core features of the product and the main reason for the purchase of an ADC in my company. These features bring a lot of resources that improve the experience of the users.
• NetScaler Gateway: Why? Availability/Security: We delivered more than 200 applications thru Xenapp. This feature give us the possibility to deliver the applications anywhere. Currently, 30% of access is made through our NetScaler Gateway (Internet connections).
• Global Server Load Balancing: Why? Availability: Bring us the possibility to load balance our ISPs links, delivering DNS responses thru available ISP providers.
• Reverse Proxy/AAA Authentication: Why? Availability/Security: Many local websites/applications are now available through the internet, with NetScaler acting as reverse proxy, and through AAA authentication in order to authenticate only necessary users.

We are replacing the necessity of any kind of load balance software/components (like Microsoft NLB, SAP Web Dispatcher, DNS Round Robin) and begin to centralize all Load Balancing necessities in the same NetScaler Hardware.

The product provides some templates to integrate with applications like MS Exchange, MS SharePoint, SAP Enterprise Portal, and others. However, the last update for these templates was 2013 (lots of applications are running on versions newer then 2013).

We have used this solution for four years.

We deployed this solution in a two-node cluster. In the beginning, we struggled to make it work properly. We also felt a lack of documentation for complex environments like ours. After some time and with external help, we make it work as it was supposed to function.

I did not encounter any issues with scalability.

I would give technical support a rating of 7/10.

The initial setup was complex. Usually, NetScaler implementations are made using the HA feature. We adopted the cluster feature. We noticed that there was a lack of knowledge from the community and Citrix support in this area. Our complex environment of network made the initial setup more difficult.

We evaluated F5 and Brocade.

Be careful in the choice of a partner to implement this product.

Citrix NetScaler is an Application Delivery Controller which we use to manage our gateway load balancing and web solution.

Citrix NetScaler supports our virtual appliance solutions.

Citrix NetScaler is a complete solution that is customizable, easy to configure, and has the most features.

Citrix NetScaler has stopped supporting the older versions and that has made it difficult for some of our clients. I would like to have continued support for older versions of the solution.

The vendor provides frequent patches, however, the security of the website has room for improvement.

The cost of the solution has room for improvement.

I have been using the solution for almost six years.

The solution is stable.

The solution is scalable.

The tech support is good.

Positive

The older version was complex to set up but now the solution's GUI is easy to configure.

The deployment consists of going to the storefront and configuring Citrix NetScaler on-premises.

The deployment does not take long but after the basic configuration, we have to customize based on the customer's requirements.

The implementation is completed in-house.

Our clients have seen a return on investment.

I give the price of the solution a seven out of ten.

I give the solution an eight out of ten.

The maintenance of the solution is not complex.

Citrix NetScaler is the best Application Delivery Controller on the market and I recommend it to others.

We mostly use VPN and enroll the NetScaler.

The most valuable feature is the SSL VPN.

The SLB could be better, and they should improve it. We want to see REST proxy and WAF capabilities in the next release.

We have been using this solution for three and a half years. It is deployed on-premises.

It is a stable product, and I rate the stability an eight out of ten. In addition, we have not faced any complications with the hardware.

I rate the scalability an eight out of ten, and we have no issues. We have 3000 people using Citrix NetScaler, and our business people use it daily.

I rate the technical support a six out of ten. We have some support delays and do not get solutions on time, which can be frustrating. In addition, their technical support does not understand our issues.

Neutral

The initial setup is a bit complicated. We used a third-party consultant for the setup. I rate the setup an eight out of ten.

The licensing is more expensive than others, and I rate it a seven out of ten.

I rate this solution a nine out of ten.

Citrix ADC is primarily used for load balancing exchange and other internal IT systems.

It is simple for both IT specialists and customers. With other products, we cannot leave the customer untrained. We can leave the customer during the early stages using Citrix ADC.

The stability of Citrix ADC needs to be improved.

The technical support could be improved. They do not respond or assist customers in a timely manner.

I have been working with Citrix ADC for approximately eight years.

It is typically deployed on-premises, but it is occasionally deployed on a hybrid cloud.

There have been many crashes since the last build.

Citrix ADC is easy to scale.

Technical support is different in every situation. In one case it went very well and quickly other cases it took longer.

Technical support could improve, but it is possible that my issue was complicated.

I am also working with F5, Kemp, Barracuda, Cisco, and NGINX.

Loadbalancer.org is less complex than Citrix. In some cases, our customers do not have an engineer on staff who can support this device.

These customers have a large number of Linux engineers but don't have the money. We suggested using Loadbalancer.org and other open-source tools. Many customers are of different sizes and have different budgets.

The installation is simple for both manual configuration and automatic deployment.

Our company is partners with Citrix and F5 BIG-IP.

I would rate Citrix ADC an eight out of ten.