Michael, Can you clarify the types of connections you are describing below when using Citrix?
Are they: PC to PC UNIX to PC PC to UNIX UNIX to UNIX Thanks tj ** -----Original Message----- ** From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ** [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Michael Milette ** Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2002 9:51 AM ** To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ** Subject: Re: Citrix v. VNC ** ** ** Unless you are running on a UNIX platform, the most obvious ** difference to ** me is that VNC does not offer the option to have multiple ** concurrent users ** make use of a single server. ** ** Here are some other advantages of Citrix over VNC: ** ** - Multi-user: You can have many users use the same machine at ** the same time ** - Automatic Local Drive, Printer, Sound, Clipboard, Serial port mapping. ** You get access to all of these remote peripherals from within ** your remote ** session. (yes, I know VNC has limited clipboard sharing). File ** copying is ** as simple as drag and drop from the server or network drive to ** your local ** drive and back. I have even heard of some people who are ** hotsynching their ** PDA's though the MetaFrame session. ** - When you need to upgrade software, you need only upgrade your Citrix ** servers instead of a whole bunch of workstations. Recent ** versions of Citrix ** MetaFrame even allow you to have the client automatically upgraded on ** remote PC's. ** - Seamless sessions: Citrix MetaFrame allows you to run applications in ** their own window, as if they were really running right on your desktop. ** Even your whole desktop theme gets applied to the application's ** window like ** colours and fonts. You can minimize, and resize windows. It is ** really well ** integrated. You can even put shortcuts right on the remote users desktop. ** - Reliable sessions: Sessions are much more responsive than VNC ** sessions, ** even over low bandwidth (like 28.8 dial-up modem or less), due ** to the way ** the technology has been implemented. You will virtually never see screen ** update failures with the ICA client. ** - Can be load balanced and clustered: If you have several ** servers, and one ** server goes down or is very busy, the next user will be connected to a ** server that isn't as busy. ** - Security: If you use technology like VNC or PC Anywhere, each ** workstation ** requires its own IP address. Assuming that your workstations are behind ** firewalls, you will need a port open for each of them. By contrast, ** MetaFrame only requires a single port though which everyone ** connects. Also, ** since it is a server, you have ultimate physical control over ** the machine ** and can afford to put your money into better quality hardware ** and support ** things like RAID or redundant power supplies, thereby reducing ** the chances ** of system failure. ** ** Citrix MetaFrame is a great, cost effective tool if you are running a ** standardized environment. Depending on the configuration of the ** server and ** the applications being used, each server can host up to 100 concurrent ** users. There isn't actually a fixed number. Its more a matter of ** how much ** horsepower you give it (memory, CPUs, bandwidth, etc). Sure it will cost ** you more initially, but in the long run, your maintenance costs ** will be way ** down when compared with an army of workstations dedicated to ** remote access. ** ** On the other hand, if everyone will be running their own experiments in ** their remote sessions, and virtually no two users will be using the same ** application, you would probably do better to have them connect ** to their own ** workstation and let them mess that up. At least when their machine goes ** down, it won't take everyone else with them. Although NT technology ** prevents one application from crashing another, there is nothing that ** really prevents one application from consuming virtually 100% of ** the CPU so ** as long as your applications are well behaved, you won't have a problem. ** ** There is (or at least was) a less expensive solution. Citrix may still ** offer a product called WinFrame. Basically it is based on the ** Windows 3.51 ** platform. Although it doesn't support the latest GUI and hence ** the latest ** applications, it could suit your needs depending on your ** requirements. The ** biggest advantage to WinFrame over other solutions such as ** Windows Terminal ** Services or even Citrix MetaFrame is the licensing. It is a very simple ** concurrent licensing scheme. If you want to support 1000 users, ** but never ** expect to have more than 40 users at any given time, you need only worry ** about getting 40 licenses. There are no CALS or any other licenses ** required. Its a great way to make a custom application available to the ** world for example. Contact Citrix if you don't see it on their web site. ** ** If you only have a few users who would be using such a service, ** you might ** want to give Windows XP Pro and it's "Remote Desktop Connection" ** a try. It ** is basically a one user version of Windows Terminal Services and ** includes ** many of the features available in MetaFrame. Remember, one user ** at a time, ** whether they are local or remote. ** ** Expensive is all relative. Any good IT architect will look beyond the ** initial setup cost and weigh at the long term costs like maintenance and ** support as well as the benefits the technology brings to the ** organization ** such as gains in productivity and flexibility. ** ** Sure VNC seems like a nice inexpensive technology to implement ** up front... ** for small groups of users. As soon as the number of users ** increases though, ** so do your support costs. ** ** Don't get me wrong, I use VNC and firmly believe that VNC does have its ** place. It's just not for remote access by more than a few users ** a corporate ** environment. On the other hand, software like Terminal Server or ** MetaFrame ** are not the right kind of tools to use for supporting users or servers. ** ** In the long run, you will find that you can cut your costs and increase ** user satisfaction by using the right technology in the first ** place. Isn't ** that what IT is all about? ** ** Michael Milette ** ** At 10:41 AM 2002-04-11, you wrote: ** >A major figure in our Medical School (Sr. Vice President for Health ** >Sciences) sent the memo below to all of our faculty this morning. The ** >gist of the memo is that Citrix was considered for use by physicians in ** >the Med School but it was found to be too expensive. I'm ** wondering if VNC ** >could do the job. Does Citrix do the same thing as VNC or is ** it entirely ** >different? ** > ** >Mike ** > ** >-- ** >Michael B. Miller, Ph.D. ** >Assistant Professor ** >Division of Epidemiology ** >University of Minnesota ** >http://taxa.epi.umn.edu/~mbmiller/ ** --------------------------------------------------------------------- ** To unsubscribe, mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the line: ** 'unsubscribe vnc-list' in the message BODY ** See also: http://www.uk.research.att.com/vnc/intouch.html ** --------------------------------------------------------------------- ** --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the line: 'unsubscribe vnc-list' in the message BODY See also: http://www.uk.research.att.com/vnc/intouch.html ---------------------------------------------------------------------
