Citrix Gateway (or Citrix NetScaler Gateway) is an access gateway with SSL VPN solution, providing single sign-on (SSO) and authentication for remote end users of network assets.
$995
per month
F5 BIG-IP
Score 9.3 out of 10
N/A
F5 BIG-IP software from Seattle-based F5 Networks is a load balancing and application protection solution suite available on cloud or via virtual editions, on a subscription or perpetual licensing basis.
N/A
Pricing
Citrix Gateway
F5 BIG-IP
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Citrix Gateway
F5 BIG-IP
Free Trial
No
No
Free/Freemium Version
No
No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
No setup fee
Additional Details
The price for a Citrix Gateway (VPX) perpetual license is $995.00.
You must contact the sales team for subscription license pricing.
We faced many challenges trying to integrate F5 into newer versions of Citrix Web Interface with Secure Gateway to front end our XenApp environments. After migrating to Citrix NetScaler we had a much less complex configuration to manage, performance and user satisfaction was …
Easy to configure , hardware based , no need to maintain or secure operating system and better performance. Better performance and stability against Citrix. With the virtualization feature you can have many virtual appliances for other environments like PoCs or Developments …
As I said previously, the F5 BIG-IP products are far and away the easiest, most robust and powerful application delivery platform I've ever worked on. The user experience was really the most noteworthy difference when using other products. The Kemp Load master platform was …
As a load balancer F5 BIG-IP provides reliable load balancing and health checks. It’s also highly configurable via CLI and GUI, making F5 BIG-IP easy to use, set up, and configure in a city of ways. Other vendors are not close to the ease of use F5 provides.
Citrix is used by everyone in our Company globally across departments, and provides a standardized, very clean, rarely-changing launchpad for all the common apps your team may need. It connects to Okta for necessary security. From my understanding, app assignment to users from the back end is also very simple. That being said, while the lack of changes over the years helps with guides and familiarity, Citrix is not without it's flaws that could use updating - apps refusing to open, scheduled app crashing at 12:00pm EST every day, setup being not as streamlined as it could be for new users, ease of use lacking on the desktop app, lack of accessible guides/quick walkthrough of what the platform is upon first login, etc. Overall, I look forward to improvements for Citrix, though overall I appreciate it's simplicity leading to visual ease of navigation.
Definitely in larger environments, more mature organizations that obviously have the budget to spend and want best in class. Where it struggles is those organizations that don't have the funding and money to spend on it and need more basic functionality. So I'd say that's smaller customers we've worked with and kind of mid-market. They tend to get scared when they get the quotes. Also we've had some struggles with account team consistency. So for the sales team, just a lot of turnover and a lot of missteps on customer calls.
allows seamless use of 2-factor authentication for heightened security within the VPN, and lowers risk of an external hack because of it.
it allows for differing levels of security. access can be set specifically through the VPN so 2 users can use the same site and get different results depending on their active directory security policy.
It can grant the ability to launch a single application or an entire VPN envelope
I mean from a basic level, it actually satisfies all the use cases we have, which is basically to have multiple web servers for the front end and then you want that to be equally split across. The traffic comes in from all over the world. We use DRA protection and everything, but then we also internally want to make sure all the servers are being utilized and we provide much more availability across all servers. We just make sure BIG-IP sits in between and handles the traffic accordingly. And it's pretty basic and it comes to drawing traffic. It's pretty easy to configure and set it up and then forget.
Recently we have been deploying F5 web application firewall and we have started the deployment. We have already moved applications out there, but we are not yet to the point wherein I could comment any positive feedback or any negative feedback because we are still going through it, right. But as far as I'm concerned, I don't see any drawbacks or any shortcomings on the F5 product lineup.
Citrix is a visually very clean platform, allowing for ease of use from even the least tech-savvy. That being said, the apps crashes a lot (scheduled or otherwise), and apps very often refuse to open from the dashboard, making for a frustrating/confusing experience from those who have not yet experienced these same issues daily for years now. The launcher app (for MacBook) leaves a lot to be desired in terms of both setup and daily use, making the web version more viable. First-time users are also often confused on what Citrix is - and how each app connects in order to open a program (explaining "log into Citrix on the web, then download the launcher app, then launch the Spectra app via Citrix web, which will open in the Citrix launcher app on your laptop to launch the app, but you have to paste in the URL again and log in again to access" is a handful)
It's not difficult to understand the parts of application configurations and features. Setting up new virtual servers with multiple profiles, certificates, and nodes is easy for new users through the web interface, which also translates to programability in scripts, DevOps, or other configuration management use-cases. Users from different backgrounds such as networking and infrastructure can use F5 BIG-IP, while users who are familiar with API calls can easily configure objects without needing to understand the platform at all.
Support is pretty good and pretty fast to respond. I can't say I can really complain about the support experience I've had with them, as they've resolved issues within a reasonable time-frame. Of course, they could always be faster and better, but I think for what we pay, it's well worth the money.
On the occasions when we've had to engage f5 support, they have been great. They have always resolved our issues quickly and been easy to work with and professional. The reason I give them a 10 out of 10, however, is because when we've had issues that have crossed over between the f5 BIG-IP, our Cisco switches, and our Microsoft IIS server the f5 support representatives have been extremely knowledgeable about every product and device involved and have been able to troubleshoot end-to-end without having to engage other vendors.
We chose Citrix Netscaler Gateway for its wide market presence and its great experience over time. Although the implementation time may be longer than in the other solutions, I think the results are better and it allows configuration with greater capacity than the others. The cost is similar in all the solutions seen.
That's the one thing that really stood out. It was a lot easier to use from an administrator standpoint, so I think that's the one thing that really made our team decide to go with this product versus another competitor. Just ease of use.
The largest positive impact was that it provided a path up upgrade from the now defunct CSG Citrix product. Because Netscaler Gateway is an at cost product, where CSG was not, one could argue there is no monetary ROI but the ROI in this scenario comes more from the ability to not have to use a non Citrix product and learn the skills needed to administer it.
Negative wise, Netscaler Gateway can be quite costly in both upfront costs and maintenance fees. It is part of business and a requirement but when using it as a replacement for CSG you will have to account for several thousands of dollars per year in additional cost.
Because it can implemented as a virtual server (it comes in both hardware and non hardware versions) the lack of need to add one more piece of hardware to our data center saves in space, up front costs, and power/cooling needs if you opt to go with the software based version.
