We performed a comparison between Loadbalancer.org and Radware Alteon 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."Load balancing helps us distribute both incoming and outgoing data loads evenly among the servers, preventing overload on a single server."
"The load balancers have an easy installation and a relatively simple, easy user interface to use."
"We have about 30,000 connections going through at any one time and it's fine, it doesn't seem to sweat. It doesn't get overloaded."
"It does what it’s supposed to do which is balancing an important intranet site we are using, so if one server dies, the second becomes active straight away."
"The features I find valuable in this solution are the ease of managing the logs on the WAFs, the ease to identify break-in attempts into the network, the front-end firewall, and a more specific firewall."
"The user interface precludes need to be well versed with Linux IPVS command line. This make it easy for junior team members to participate in managing load balancing needs."
"Existing customers are trying to migrate from the physical F5 load balancer to the AVI load balancer because it is scalable and easily managed."
"I found scalability in Loadbalancer.org valuable."
"The health status information, with its highly detailed reporting, has saved us time on troubleshooting. We have the precise information needed that helps us find different types of situations."
"I like the web GUI. It's very intuitive and easy to use."
"The most valuable aspect is the ability to customize the types of load-balancing scenarios needed for customized applications. Some of the load balancers on the market today are strictly out-of-hand load balancers for SSL or HTTP. Radware Alteon is most useful for customizing in-house applications based on ports and protocols."
"I found the link load balancer and server load balancer are the most valuable."
"Security is one of the most valuable features that I like. It is easy to use and easy to configure."
"The GUI was a valuable feature. It was uncomplicated and easy to use."
"The command line interface is simple and very user-friendly."
"The interface is easy, it's friendly, and has good alerting."
"There are many features you can set in the backend of Loadbalancer. They should simplify the configuration. The administrator should be able to configure it more simply. How it is now, you can only configure it if you have a lot of experience."
"The automatic refresh of the System Overview webpage: It sometimes has an extra webpage reload (after a change) before you see it is executed. This can be confusing."
"Compared to the physical products, the solution's throughput is a little less."
"Possibly a more graphical overview page (with colors) to give a two second overview to see if everything is working fine."
"They're mostly designed to balance a particular type of traffic. I wanted to load balance DNS, and they just don't do it the way that we wanted to. So they're not used as DNS load balancers."
"Loadbalancer.org's complexity could be reduced."
"It doesn't have the bonding capability feature."
"We could enhance the security aspects of the load balancer."
"I would like to see the loading documentation improved."
"You need to have pretty good internal knowledge of the solution."
"Their support can be better. The Radware management is very proactive. We can connect to anybody in Radware Management in India. We can even connect with the MD of Radware India. However, their lower level staff should be more proactive towards the customers."
"I would like this solution to have an integration tool that will convert configuration from other software, into readable values for this product during implementation."
"The solution could be more robust."
"Support is very important because if we get good support, we'll be able to sell and supply more numbers."
"It can be improved by combining the web application firewall (WAF) facility."
"We’d like the solution to include more security features in the standard license."
Loadbalancer.org is ranked 10th in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 22 reviews while Radware Alteon is ranked 7th in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 33 reviews. Loadbalancer.org is rated 8.8, while Radware Alteon is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Loadbalancer.org writes "Great WAF - low-maintenance solution that performs as advertised ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Radware Alteon writes "It's a good fit for a small team because the maintenance is easier and you don't need to know how to code". Loadbalancer.org is most compared with Citrix NetScaler, HAProxy, Fortinet FortiADC and F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM), whereas Radware Alteon is most compared with F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM), Citrix NetScaler, F5 Advanced WAF, A10 Networks Thunder ADC and HAProxy. See our Loadbalancer.org vs. Radware Alteon 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.
