We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"The ease of use is very good. It's very robust. It just sits and works."
"Compared to F5, which I used about six years ago, the A10 is much easier when routing. You don't have to use the wildcard bits to route it between the different segments. It's much less troublesome to configure."
"The SLB and GSLB load balancing are the most valuable features. They meet our need to do server-side load balancing and global site load balancing so we can distribute traffic, not only intra-data center, but inter-data center."
"The ADCs are pretty straightforward and easy to use. There is a GUI base where you can go in and see everything, but they also have a CLI base where you can use a command and get the information that you want, very fast."
"A lot of our SSL management is done on the front-end side, so there is one pane of glass for a lot of our security certificates. It gives us visibility. It also falls under when certificates are going to expire. Even for servers that are coming down, we can see how that affects the traffic flow by using the services map."
"It helps with the efficiency of application deployments and data security."
"It's a very friendly solution, easy to configure and it's very flexible."
"The solution is user-friendly and the CLA troubleshooting is easier compared to other solutions."
"The simplicity of the solution and its ability to integrate easily with others are its most valuable aspects."
"This is a SaaS product, so it is always up to date."
"Good customization; able to report and take action on alerts."
"The solution was very easy to configure. It wasn't hard at all to adjust it to our needs."
"Load balancing and web application firewall features are the most valuable."
"WAF feature replicates the firewall."
"The pricing is quite good."
"The solution is easy to set up."
"The user interface is what people complain about most of the time, particularly if they don't use it very often. Then they complain that it's a bit clunky."
"There is room for improvement in the GUI. I just migrated from the 2.7 software train to the 4.1, and there are still people on 2.7. The latter is a very old GUI if you compare it to F5. It's not as easy to use and a lot of things are missing. They've made a lot of improvements in the 4.1 step, but compared to the ease of use of F5, it's still quite difficult. For people who haven't got a lot of experience, the GUI can be quite challenging."
"In my opinion, they need to improve their cloud support. There is support for cloud, but not all functions are there, such as high-availability."
"There is room for improvement in the upgrading process. Sometimes we have to contact A10 for verification of some stuff."
"We are starting to do a lot with containers and how the solution hooks into Kubernetes that we haven't explored. I'm hoping that they have a lot of hooks into Kubernetes. That would be the part for improvement: Marketing use cases with containers."
"The user interface is not as pretty as it could be."
"There is two-factor authentication built-in, but it could be more robust."
"The interface and integrated custom applications can be a bit difficult."
"The pricing of the solution could be improved. Right now, it's a bit expensive."
"For the first-time user, it is difficult to understand so the user-interface needs to be improved."
"Needs easier integration with the existing SIAM."
"The security of the product could be adjusted."
"It does not have the flexibility for using public IPs in version 2."
"Scalability can be an issue."
"The monitoring on the solution could be better."
"The configuration is very specific right now and needs to be much more flexible."
"As for the initial investment in the hardware, F5 and A10 are quite similar now. For the current A10 solution, the initial cost was about $36,000. As for annual support, the F5 solution would be between $10,000 and $12,000, while the A10 is $2,200 a year for support."
"You get a lot more for your dollar with A10."
"We did try out the solution’s Harmony analytics and visibility controller for its one-year trial. Due to the cost, we chose not to keep it onsite."
"We just pay for support in addition to our licensing."
"Pricing is one of the features of the product that influence customers to use the product."
"The price is good they are very comparative."
"The price of the maintenance support is too expensive."
"It is not expensive."
"Every solution comes with a license and cost. Microsoft provides the license and the total cost is for the maintenance every year."
"Between v1 and v2, there is a lot of change in the pricing. It is very costly compared to AWS."
A10 Networks' application networking, load balancing and DDoS protection solutions accelerate and secure data center applications and networks of thousands of the world's largest enterprises, service providers, and hyper scale web providers.
Azure Application Gateway is a web traffic load balancer that enables you to manage traffic to your web applications. Traditional load balancers operate at the transport layer (OSI layer 4 - TCP and UDP) and route traffic based on source IP address and port, to a destination IP address and port.
A10 Networks Thunder ADC is ranked 5th in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 8 reviews while Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is ranked 3rd in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 11 reviews. A10 Networks Thunder ADC is rated 8.4, while Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is rated 7.0. The top reviewer of A10 Networks Thunder ADC writes "With iRule or aFleX scripting, you can influence the complete packet instead of just a few bytes or bits". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Azure Application Gateway writes "Needs better security and functionality, and requires more intelligence to make it competitive". A10 Networks Thunder ADC is most compared with F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM), Citrix ADC, Kemp LoadMaster, Radware Alteon and A10 Networks Lightning ADC, whereas Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is most compared with Azure Front Door, F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM), AWS WAF, Cloudflare and F5 Advanced WAF. See our A10 Networks Thunder ADC vs. Microsoft Azure Application Gateway 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.