Citrix NetScaler Reviews

Our primary use cases are for the different local LANs and for exchange, a local LAN SharePoint, a local LAN for web applications and for different RDP, remote desktop publishing solutions, a local LAN for intranet, web applications, internal web applications, etc. and for all command switching and full VPN gateway for Citrix and for apps and desktops. We deal with enterprise companies, so around 5,000 users. I'm the Senior Principal IT Consultant in our organization. 

Citrix is a complete solution for those looking for an all-in-one. It's all there, the NetScaler gateway, remote access, internet access, optimization, load balancing, you have Citrix desktop publishing and VDAs. You can create a complete solution with Citrix. That's a good thing. If you have to troubleshoot something there's no problem like you would have if you were working between different solutions. If you're dealing with different manufacturers, there's always a problem with troubleshooting - nobody wants to take responsibility.

The solution has too many bugs in the software and it's always difficult when you need to update. If you have bugs in one firmware and you fix them and then update, sometimes it doesn't work in the correct way. Even when there are new feature releases, the problems are not always solved. Instability is an issue. The product also offers a lot of features that are not necessary, you don't need them. 

Bug fixing is a problem in this solution and they should consider focusing on that in any future release. 

I've been using this solution for over 10 years. 

The solution is somewhat lacking in stability. 

Scalability of the solution is fine. 

Technical support could be better. Response is good but when I open a ticket at Citrix because I have a problem, it's not because I want to check a simple configuration task on a support line, I want a solution.

I worked for a long time with F5. I've only worked with Microsoft and Cisco solutions. We're currently checking other options for a new customer. 

Initial setup is straightforward, deployment time really depends on the environment of the customer. 

I think the price is okay. 

If anyone wants to implement this solution, it's important to be clear about your use case in order to grow with the product. Functionality always depends on the underlying networking. If there is trouble in the underlying networking, then you'll always have problems with NetScaler.

I would rate this product a three out of 10. 

We primarily use it for load balancers. 

It has helped us to increase the resiliency and performance of the application.

There are multiple features that I have found to be valuable including load balancing, supply authentication, web for application firewall, and the reverse proxy.

The technical support has room for improvement. 

Stability is amazing. 

Scalability is amazing. There are 1,000 plus employees that are using it. Anybody from the CEO to the technicians or the receptionists.

The initial setup was straightforward. We only required one staff member for the deployment. 

You get the value for your money. There aren't any hidden fees. 

It's one of the best application delivery controllers available in the market and it requires very minimal administrative effort to manage it.

I would rate it a ten out of ten. 

We are a solution provider and when we need to implement application delivery control then Citrix ADC is one of the products that we suggest to our clients.

Manageability and visibility are good.

The interface needs to be improved because the competition is coming up with ones that are more eye-catching, straightforward, and sophisticated.

I have been working with Citrix for three years.

We are very happy with its stability.

We have no issues with scalability.

Currently, our customers for Citrix ADC are large-sized organizations.

I would rate the technical support a seven out of ten. They are okay. When they are investigating a problem then they need a lot of information, and there is a lot of back and forth.

The situation is the same with most of the big vendors.

We also deal with Fortinet FortiADC, and one of our clients recently had to switch to Fortinet because of a management decision. Importantly, however, they were still happy with Citrix.

The complexity of the initial setup and length of time for deployment depends on the customer that we're dealing with. If it's a ministry or government then it's going to take a long time. These deployments might take a month to complete. If it's a small or medium-sized customer then it might be between one and three days, and you're finished.

This product is more expensive than some of the competitors.

In the future, we are hoping to provide more cloud-based solutions. However, at this time, there is not enough maturity, and as such, corporations and government offices want on-premises solutions.

Citrix ADC is a product that I can recommend, without any doubt or hesitation.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

We used it to manage a data center hosting environment and had more than 250 HA pairs of Citrix NetScalers (both physical and virtual) to maintain/manage customer environments. Each environment was different, each was a customer-dedicated environment.

This was a standard load-balancing solution provided to our customers. They didn't have many complaints about the way their traffic was being managed. We were able to handle specific requirements for persistence/stickiness.

Content Switching since it provides flexibility for routing traffic as desired to designated real servers. It also provides good geo capabilities through its GSLB feature.

Development team's response time could be better.

No major issues with stability.

Scalability is good with the virtual appliance, where you can easily scale using the appropriate license and match up with the appropriate virtual machine.

We had a mix of makes/models, as we supported a large customer base, such as F5, Cisco CSS. We have never had a case where we had to switch NetScaler out for another make.

Initial setup is straightforward if you know basic networking concepts. It doesn't take a lot of reading to set one up.

I would rate NetScaler as a seven out of 10 for good technical support on routine issues, but any issues that needed the development team's involvement took a long time.

If you don't have very specific requirements such as the ASM that F5 offers, this would do almost all tasks as far as load-balancing is concerned (geo load-balancing as well).

The main use of Citrix NetScaler was for application integration. My clients wanted their applications to be managed through Citrix NetScaler.

The most valuable feature of  Citrix NetScaler was the seamless integration. Additionally, the UI is good.

Citrix NetScaler has been recently acquired by another company and the support has been negatively impacted, the solution is at its end of life. The support for the solution could improve. The sales team needs to be improved.

I have used Citrix NetScaler within the last 12 months.

Citrix NetScaler is stable and robust.

Citrix NetScaler is scalable but could improve.

I have three to four customers.

I rate the scalability of Citrix NetScaler a seven out of ten.

The video technical support from Citrix NetScaler was satisfactory.

The initial setup of Citrix NetScaler is straightforward. The process is easier than competitors. The solution took us approximately 20 days to deploy because we had many applications that needed to be scheduled.

The requirement was to provide load balancing of multiple applications and publish all the applications behind Citrix NetScaler.

The license for Citrix NetScaler is on an annual basis and it is reasonably priced.

I would not recommend this solution to others.

I rate Citrix NetScaler an eight out of ten.

This solution acts as my web server, web application server, firewall, and load balancer. I also use it for IPSec 4 to IPSec 6 conversion.

The most valuable feature is load balancing. This solution will do both global and local load balancing.

The WAF features are very helpful.

The WAF component needs to be simplified so that it is easier to use.

In the next release, I would like to see more firewall policy support.

I have been using Citrix NetScaler VPX for about five years.

There are a few bugs here and there, but technical support has been able to assist with them.

This solution is easy to scale if we have up to ten servers, but much higher and we need to use a different level of license. It is a little bit expensive.

We have approximately 2,000 users.

I am quite satisfied with the technical support.

We did not use another solution prior to this one.

The initial setup is straightforward.

I installed this solution with the help of my own team.

Our licensing fees including technical support are approximately $3,500 USD.

We evaluated a solution by F5, but we found it to be a little complex and we didn't proceed with it.

My advice for anybody who is considering this product is that it works best for small-scale industry. I would recommend this for a small business, but not for larger organizations. It works quite well for 1,000 or 2,000 users, but I would not recommend more than that.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

The primary use for using it is the wholesale application and VDIs.

I have been working the cost factors, while the performance and application are good, the factory cost brought back to you is not. Therefore, we are currently comparing the product with Microsoft RemoteApp.

The most valuable feature would be the Citrix permanent server.

It is cost-effective, if you consider the permanent server. Also, the management is easy with no downtimes. 

There are some features which are missing.

What I am looking for is something like OneDrive. We are facing an issue with OneDrive on the XenApp and XenDesktop. We can't use OneDrive with what we have. So, a fully, operational OneDrive support is what I am looking for.

Stability is good.

Scalability is good.

We like working with Citrix technical support.

I have been working with Citrix technology for the last 10 to 13 years. We have not switched solutions during this time. 

From a Citrix perspective, it was straightforward. From the application perspective, there are some tweaks that we need to do. So, we are working on those tweaks.

Currently, we are evaluating the cost prospective from the BDA cost prospective. We are evaluating Microsoft and Citrix as they are the leaders in this solution. If you compare Citrix and Microsoft RemoteApp, Citrix is the best compared to RemoteApp. RemoteApp is basically meant for a small business use case.

We are using Citrix XenApp and XenDesktop, but we are planning to now expand into the same product. 

Most important criteria when selecting a vendor: 

• Cost
• Performance
• Stability
• Scalability
• High availability.

Load Balancer and Access Gateway

Allowed secure access to authenticated user not on the network without having to download client side software

Alert Management

2 years

Minor issue setting up VeriSign Certificates

No

Not applicable - We were only setting up 4 Virtual Servers

6