Likelihood to Recommend The RDCMan software is highly effective at allowing me to organize and manage a large number of servers, and desktop computers. It’s quick and easy to use. It’s also highly reliable. In all the years that I have used it, I have never once experienced a crash or any other sort of error.
Read full review Citrix Netscaler can be a powerful network appliance for environments that are fully committed and open to utilizing a network appliance that isn't made by a traditional network vendor. Administrator user experience has improved over the years and will continue to improve with the flexibility of virtual and physical appliances available for medium and large enterprises.
Read full review Pros Quick Easy Minimal work on user end Read full review Flexibility. NetScaler assumes its admins know a bit about networking and in-depth details surrounding the applications they are configuring access for/to. This being so, the range of configuration options is very broad allowing various versions' combinations of protocol patterns, expressions, rules etc., all to the benefit of the admin. Granularity. Having such a broad range of configuration options available, while still allowing simple options to be configured simply. The GUI is well-stylized and navigation has a good flow. Ease of control. For load-balancing of simple services right out of the box, NetScaler makes it pretty easy, compared to the range of options available in the surrounding GUI and under the hood. Read full review Cons When trying to connect to a server/machine, and it doesn't connect, there is a "Disconnected" message that is displayed in the thumbnail. There is no information beyond this that explains why the server/machine did/could not connect. It would be helpful to the IT Administrator to know this information, even if Microsoft Remote Desktop Connection Manager (RDCMan) kept a log somewhere where this information can be analyzed. There doesn't seem to be an option for connecting to a server that is usually only able to be accessed from a jump server. This will not connect if the server is set up as a server/machine within RDCman. This would be a beneficial feature to have within RDCman. Maybe one of the missing options is to be able to set this in the prospects for the jump server (within the Microsoft Remote Desktop Connection Manager (RDCMan) window). Read full review The documentation could use an overhaul with specific examples related to the command line as well as GUI. Explanations in the documentation would also be helpful. Being able to have more than just one routing table would allow the ability to leverage security. Read full review Usability Improve on the specifics I mentioned previously and could be a 10/10 product. It is also a confusingly branded product that I have supported in two large enterprises where IT departments are unsure if the product belongs to the Citrix remote access support team or the Network infrastructure support team (it should be the later) and typically under utilized.
Read full review Support Rating Plenty of information and support online, and with many things it's pretty straight forward for the average tech to navigate and work with. But with most things online you're not the only person that's had the issue before, and using a search engine you should be able to figure it out.
Read full review Overall, our organization's experience with Citrix support is that support can be hit or miss. Oftentimes it takes multiple attempts and much longer than desirable to obtain a viable solution for issues experienced with their products. It would be great to see Citrix invest time, effort, and almighty dollars into improving their support and bug fix process across the board.
Read full review Alternatives Considered RDCMan outshines
TeamViewer in every possible way. It’s fast, more reliable, and easier to use. I have had frequent crashes and issues when using
TeamViewer , while none with RDCMan. Screen responsiveness also seems much better with RDCMan versus
TeamViewer . I would often experience lag issues when using
TeamViewer .
Read full review We chose Citrix ADC over Kemp and F5 due to additional integrations with various products such as Citrix/Horizon/Monitoring tools. We additionally chose ADC due to better ease of use and ability to have the appliances be virtual or physical, with the configuration being a simple migration of code which provided flexibility to be able to do a hybrid environment with ease.
Read full review Return on Investment One positive impact it's had was that it has made it easier to manage servers since this could be done from a central location and through only one program. This, in effect, has helped to increase efficiency and save the time of those doing server management. Another positive impact was that it is a product that could be deployed/installed by almost anyone, and one that fits reasonably quickly. It also doesn't use a whole lot of system resources when running, so this, in turn, helps the IT/Server Administrators still be efficient in the other work they have to do. Read full review It has saved a tremendous amount of money and manpower by allowing for broad support without the need for a VPN. The security functions within Netscaler enabled our business to pass additional IT-based audits. Having a full Citrix stack from front to back makes our business look more professional both to our users and outsiders. Read full review ScreenShots