Brian Madden Live - BrianMadden.com

Mark Schill wrote Podcast

on Thu, Aug 18 2005 10:43 PM

Very nice. I was wondering when someone was going to do a Citrix podcast.

Josh Holst wrote Very Cool

on Fri, Aug 19 2005 9:06 AM

I was wondering where Brian has been but, looks like he's been hard at work coming up with new ways to get information to us.

Oh yea the interview good also.

Brian Madden wrote Re: Very Cool

on Fri, Aug 19 2005 9:24 AM

I've been on a mental holiday this summer. Not too much working. No IM... just relaxing. But now I'm starting up again.. Look for a lot of cool stuff and tons of new articles in Sept and Oct.

Brian

Josh Holst wrote Re: Re: Very Cool

on Fri, Aug 19 2005 10:04 AM

Don't blame you. Are you giving any presentations at iForm in Vegas this year? Maybe the Hard Rock will be as nice as it was in March.

Katie Koepke wrote Awesome

on Fri, Aug 19 2005 7:00 PM

What a great way to share information. I had no idea T Scale was part of PS 4 and the extent to what was going on behind the scenes with the simple memory optimization check box! That’s pretty sweet that RTO is making the expanded tools available for free too.

Congrats Brian! Thanks Kevin, for the great information!

Guest wrote Microsoft Rebase

on Sat, Aug 20 2005 2:40 PM

The rebase tool Kevin mentions is available in the Windows Server 2003 Platform SDK available at:
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=A55B6B43-E24F-4EA3-A93E-40C0EC4F68E5&displaylang=en

More information about it is at:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/tools/tools/rebase.asp

I was going to do this years ago with Thin Radio but had no time.
Good Job Brian!
Jim Kenzig
http://thethin.net

Rene Vester wrote great podcast

on Wed, Aug 24 2005 6:14 AM

Was i right to understand that Tscale as it was known before is now close to 'fully integrated' under the 'memory optimization'-cover in CPS 4.0 and with the free download from the RTO site we can do almost the things you could with Tscale before? this is great and the oppportunity to download the tool for exclusions and the likes is great!

Nice work on the interview, thank you Kevin for the information, even I understand whats in the Voodoo-box of memory optimization now :)

Great Idea Brian, hope to see and hear many new streams :)

/Rene

Rene Berendsen wrote RE: great podcast

on Thu, Aug 25 2005 6:48 AM

Absolutely interessting pod cast !!

Hope the next one will come online soon !

Kevin Goodman wrote Re: Awesome

on Fri, Aug 26 2005 5:48 PM

Here is the link to sign up for the Optimization Console Beta:

http://www.rtosoft.com/enter.asp?ID=369

Kevin Goodman wrote Re: Microsoft Rebase

on Fri, Aug 26 2005 5:51 PM

Jim,

Thanks for the post. I've added some info about the other tools we talked about.

Process Explorer:

Process Explorer is another SysInternals utility that you can use to determine if a running application has relocations. Once installed, choose Options|"Configure Highlighting" then click "Relocated DLLs". Then choose View|"Lower Pane View" and select "DLLs". Then select the application from the "Process" list. If the application has relocations, the Dlls will show up highlighted in the bottom pane.

http://www.sysinternals.com/Utilities/ProcessExplorer.html

Dumpbin:
Dumpbin is command line utility that ships with the Platform SDK or Visual Studio .NET. Dumpbin is useful for determining a .DLLs existing base address.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/en-us/vccore/html/_core_dumpbin_reference.asp

For example the base address of kernel32.dll is (hex) 7C800000

Here is the output of dumpbin:

C:\WINDOWS\system32>dumpbin -headers kernel32.dll

Dump of file kernel32.dll

PE signature found

File Type: DLL

FILE HEADER VALUES

OPTIONAL HEADER VALUES
10B magic # (PE32)
7.10 linker version
81E00 size of code
6FE00 size of initialized data
0 size of uninitialized data
B436 entry point (7C80B436)
1000 base of code
7F000 base of data
7C800000 image base (7C800000 to 7C8F3FFF)

Forcing debug output in TScale or CPS 4.0

In the registry key: HKLM\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Services\ctxaltstr for CPS 4.0 or HKLM\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Services\tsaltstr for TScale

Create a DWORD value: DebugFlags

Set the value to any combination of the following flags:

Trace Errors 0x00000002
Trace Redirections 0x00002000
Trace Exclusions 0x00008000
Trace System protected file optimizations 0x00020000

For example, to trace redirections and exclusions set the value to 0xA000.

This will trace exclusions to a debugger or a tool like DebugView from SysInternals.

www.sysinternals.com/files/debugviewNt.zip

Kevin Goodman wrote Re: great podcast

on Fri, Aug 26 2005 5:56 PM

CPS 4.0 contains just the virtual memory opts from TScale it doesn't have the shaping or registry optimizations.

BTW, If you want to see what we have up our sleeve for an encore, sign up for the TScale Advanced Beta:

http://www.rtosoft.com/enter.asp?ID=369

Todd Maiorano wrote Compatibility Concern

on Thu, Sep 29 2005 2:37 PM

I attended a Citrix hosted dinner last night with Citrix, VMWare and NetScaler to learn how all three products mesh together. I am new to the virtualization concept and was eager to learn all that can be done with VMWare. I can see us using it at our DR location. Anyhow, I would be a little weary about consolidating our Citrix Servers for the fear that future versions of Presentation Server will not be 100% compatible with VMWare. Any thoughts on this? Should I be concerned about this or should I assume these companies are certifying their apps against each other?

Brian Madden wrote RE: Compatibility Concern

on Fri, Sep 30 2005 7:15 PM

I don't think I would be worried about this. I'm not sure who's certifying what exactly, but Citrix doesn't even recognize that it's running within a VM, and that's a good thing if you ask me.

Brian

Jeff Pitsch wrote RE: Compatibility Concern

on Sat, Oct 1 2005 9:00 AM

Citrix talked last year at iForum on how they were embracing virtualization more and more. They talked of their lab being run in VM's quite a bit. I wouldn't worry so much about will Presentation Server run. I would be more worried onthe performance hit you'd take by moving to a virtualized architecture.

Guest wrote Thoughts, concerns, etc.

on Wed, Oct 5 2005 11:49 AM

Thanks Brian for talking with them and finding out more info. We as users have seen the newsgroups go away, knowledgebases become unusable, and don't see much on the company.

The product is good and shows great potential and hopefully they will rally around it. They have been really good at resolving issues quickly and are responsive. Hopefully the transition won't hinder that within the company.

One thing that would be nice is for them to open an area where they can receive comments from their userbase. I think Tarantella abandoned the newsgroups and it was the users who were supporting themselves. So this gives Propalms a chance to shine if they can listen, communicate, and build a better mousetrap.

Guest wrote 100% ACK

on Wed, Oct 5 2005 2:56 PM

Please, Propalms - create a support newsgroup

Brian Madden wrote Propalms Support Forum on BrianMadden.com

on Wed, Oct 5 2005 4:56 PM

Just FYI, I have a Propalms / Tarantella / New Moon forum in my forums area at:

http://www.brianmadden.com/forum/tt.asp?forumid=26

There are only 50 posts in there, but I've emailed Propalms and asked them to monitor it for now.

Brian

Andrew wrote Cool Stuff

on Fri, Oct 7 2005 8:15 AM

Was a great interview, but Brian, your podcasts are getting quieter and quieter - turn the mic up!! :)

Guest wrote great podcast

on Wed, Oct 19 2005 4:24 PM

I listened it in my car, great show Brian!

Dan Shappir wrote App streaming and licensing question

on Thu, Oct 20 2005 4:50 AM

The thing I don't get about software streaming, Softricity or Citrix, is how proper software licensing is going to be guaranteed? Sure, this is an issue also with VMWare, but streaming makes it that much worse. Unless the software includes some sort of license server, the admin needs to purchase a site license. Otherwise he could very well be in violation of the license agreement. Or he could simply not care ...

Tom Howarth wrote Re: App streaming and licensing question

on Thu, Oct 20 2005 5:10 AM

Softricity has a license monitor builtin

Katie Koepke wrote Nice Show

on Thu, Oct 20 2005 2:02 PM

There’s a lot of cool stuff in the works out there. My favorite comment in regards to Application Performance Monitoring, ‘I see your sharing 4000 MP3s from Kazar… ‘!

Thanks for putting this information together, Brian. This is such a valuable resource.

Guest wrote Re: great podcast

on Thu, Oct 20 2005 6:19 PM

Jeeez u are a nerd :)

Guest wrote Part II?

on Fri, Oct 21 2005 1:24 AM

How about other recorded copy u left on the cutting room floor? Are we going to see a part 2? Thanks for this great program.

Guest wrote Again a great interview with some objective information

on Wed, Oct 26 2005 2:08 PM

Thanks to provide us so helpful and interesting discussion. It is sometimes difficult to understand the Citrix focus point, but it's good to listen some Citrix employee to tell us their future goal. For me, it's clearer.

Thanks again

Claire Stellings wrote Re: Thoughts, concerns, etc.

on Mon, Oct 31 2005 10:21 AM

Many thanks for you comments.

I can now confirm that we will be relaunching our website in the next two weeks which will include the long lost Knowledge Base and Newsgroups. Over the coming months we will working towards further enhancing both these functions and realise it is a priority.

The long awaited V4.1 will be released in the next few days, watch this space.....

Please feel free to contact me with any questions you may have on Propalms TSE by emailing claire.stellings@propalms.com

Stuart Donnelly wrote Podcasts....

on Mon, Apr 3 2006 6:53 AM

Here's my feedback on your podcasts:

- Random Podcast, when you think you have enough content to be able to fill a podcast. Not set time or date, along the same way you do you articles.

- Spoken Articles, this must be a must!!!

- Interviews, both technical and product interviews would be great

- Citrix Talk, yes please!

Where do we send ideas on what and who we would like to see?

Stuart.

Guest wrote carcast

on Mon, Apr 3 2006 8:43 AM

When Brian is going to publish more and more podcasts, I would definitly want to listen to it in my car, driving to work. Right now, I have a regular radio/cd player with the capability to play mp3 cd's. But of course it isn't very practical to download the postcasts and burn it to cd in order to listen in my car.

Where and how are you guys listening to podcasts?

Brian Madden wrote RE: carcast

on Mon, Apr 3 2006 9:49 AM

You can buy a cheap MP3 player for less than $100 which you can then hook up to your car via an aux in line or one of those cassette tape adapater things.

Then, there are several different (free) software products that you can get for your computer. (Personally I think iTunes is the easiest.) The podcast software will automatically download the latest podcasts and transfer them to your device. So in my case, each morning my device is ready to go, pre-loaded with that day's episodes of all the shows I like.

Brian

Tim Mangan wrote the new "old cnet show"

on Mon, Apr 3 2006 11:26 AM

CNet used to have a technology call in show (it might still exist, but they lost their good host and I stopped listening a year ago). Brian could once in a while (once per quarter/month?) do a call in show, giving folks in this space to call in to talk about something ad-hoc. The key is Brian limiting them to a quick idea (30 sec max?). It could be a vendor giving a blurb about a product, or someone commenting on industry direction.

tim

Jeff Embry wrote Podcasts

on Mon, Apr 3 2006 12:03 PM

Brian,

Great show....I agree that having a show for the sake of doing a show is a waste...so I would vote for random or possible once every couple weeks if it has to be scheduled.

Excellent content and good info. Keep it up.

Wish I could make it to Briforum this year. Maybe next.

- Jeff -

Guest wrote Projects and such

on Mon, Apr 3 2006 12:30 PM

Hello Brian,

What about a regular format such as:
1. A summary of the SBC news since your last podcast - things you find to be interesting.
2. New Tips and Tools for Citrix, TS, VMware, etc.
3. Feature articles
A couple of thoughts;
1. Why not do some shows reviewing project planning, design, and impelmentation for a Citrix project? An audio MIAB if you will.
2. A show on the various Citrix clients, such as which ones to use when and why as well as tips and tricks for the clients.
3. 4. A regular segment on tips and tools for Citrix, TS, VMware, etc.
5.

Guest wrote RE: Projects and such

on Mon, Apr 3 2006 12:33 PM

Let's try this again.

Hello Brian,

What about a regular format such as:
1. A summary of the SBC news since your last podcast - things you find to be interesting.
2. New Tips and Tools for Citrix, TS, VMware, etc.
3. Feature articles

A series reviewing project planning, design, and impelmentation for a Citrix project, VMware, etc? An audio MIAB if you will.
A show on the various Citrix clients, such as which ones to use when and why as well as tips and tricks for the clients.
4. Close with some suggested links and reading for the upcoming show.

Cheers,
Cole.

Guest wrote Nice one

on Tue, Apr 4 2006 12:07 PM

I love the podcasts, keep them up :)

Guest wrote You are so off the money on your podcast

on Tue, Apr 4 2006 10:13 PM

Citrix will always be an enterprise play because of scalability and features, but with Longhorn, the SMB market for Citrix will disappear. No company that size, needs all the features the presentation server provides. Why is Citrix adding more products now, because they realize that market segment is going to leave their product. They have always been a one trick pony always will be. You should actually pay attention to their earnings call. PS growth is flat or declining SA is on the upswing. They have made smart aquisitions but, and that is where their growth is.

Guest wrote RE: You are so off the money on your podcast

on Tue, Apr 4 2006 11:03 PM

Wow....how many things can you get wrong in one post. Let's start with the contridiction: First you say Citrix is a one trick pony and always will be...but then you say they have made smart aquisitions and that is where their growth is. Hard to be a one trick pony with new products bring in more and more revenue.

As for longhorn, while there is an increase in the TS functionality, this is far from what Citrix can provide any size customer. For the SMB, Citrix Access Essentials will continue to provide value in it's easy of installation, configuration, and management. As with every MS platform release...Citrix will continue to add value.

Finally, it would be stupid for Citrix to sit around and expect to continue to grow with one product. So why not grow into markets that have been close to what they have always done? Desktop Access (GoTo line), Access Security (Access Gateway), Web Applications (Netscaler) are natural extensions of thier business and so far have provided new growth for the company.

PS - Have you seen the Citrix stock price recently? I'd say the market disagrees with you as well.

Rudy Bauer wrote Virtualizing CAG

on Wed, Apr 5 2006 2:43 PM

Excellent program. Really made me think about virtualization and where we are going.

Gus, Rich,

Nice site. Good work on the CAG virtualization.
Maybe you should enter it in the VM contest. http://www.vmware.com/vmtn/appliances/challenge/

Shawn Bass wrote RE: Virtualizing CAG

on Wed, Apr 5 2006 6:17 PM

ORIGINAL: Rudy Bauer

Nice site. Good work on the CAG virtualization.
Maybe you should enter it in the VM contest. http://www.vmware.com/vmtn/appliances/challenge/

The VMWare appliance challenge doesn't apply to using a commercial product in the appliance (unless you received distribution rights, which I'm guessing isn't going to come from Citrix any time before we all turn into dust).

Shawn

Rudy Bauer wrote RE: Virtualizing CAG

on Wed, Apr 5 2006 6:28 PM

Too bad.

Jeff Embry wrote Excellent show

on Fri, Apr 7 2006 9:19 AM

Being fairly new to virtualization, I agree that the term 'virtualization' may be overused as a buzzword now-a-days. I, being somewhat old school, tend to think that everything has its place and that selection of server should be based on what you want to do with it. I think that virtualization has it's place and is definately the way of the future...but I don't think that it should be a catch all.

Really enjoyed the article about virtualizing a CAG and the tools available from Frameworkx.com.

Brian...keep it up.

- Jeff -

Brian Madden wrote Smart Access in a Box Link

on Fri, Apr 7 2006 11:51 AM

Hi everyone,

In the show a referenced a document called "Smart Access in a Box," by Roddy Rodstein. You can download this from his website, http://www.vellity.com.

Brian

Guest wrote Replying To:

on Fri, Apr 7 2006 8:54 PM

å‡é€Ÿæœº ç¿»è¯‘å…¬å¸ å¸æ³•è€ƒè¯• æˆéƒ½æœºç¥¨ æˆéƒ½æœºç¥¨ æˆéƒ½æœºç¥¨ æˆéƒ½æœºç¥¨ æˆéƒ½æœºç¥¨ æˆéƒ½æœºç¥¨ æˆéƒ½æœºç¥¨ æˆéƒ½æœºç¥¨ æˆéƒ½æœºç¥¨ æˆéƒ½æœºç¥¨ æˆéƒ½æœºç¥¨ æ·±åœ³æœºç¥¨|æ·±åœ³é£žæœºç¥¨|æ·±åœ³æ‰“æŠ˜æœºç¥¨|æ·±åœ³ç‰¹ä»·æœºç¥¨ æˆéƒ½æœºç¥¨ æˆéƒ½æœºç¥¨ å‡é€Ÿæœº å‡é€Ÿæœº å‡é€Ÿæœº å‡é€Ÿæœº å‡é€Ÿæœº å‡é€Ÿæœº å‡é€Ÿæœº å…è´¹æˆäººç”µå½± å…è´¹æ¿€æƒ…ç”µå½± å…è´¹è‰²æƒ…ç”µå½± å…è´¹é»„è‰²ç”µå½± å…è´¹æ€§äº¤ç”µå½± å…è´¹æˆäººç”µå½± å…è´¹æ¿€æƒ…ç”µå½± å…è´¹è‰²æƒ…ç”µå½± å…è´¹é»„è‰²ç”µå½± å…è´¹æ€§äº¤ç”µå½± å…åˆå½© æ€§æ„Ÿç¾Žå¥³åºŠä¸Šè‡ªæ‹ ä¸‰çº§ç‰‡ æˆäººå°ç”µå½± æ¿€æƒ…å°ç”µå½± è‰²æƒ…å°ç”µå½± é»„è‰²å°ç”µå½± æ¿€æƒ…è§†é¢‘ ä¸‰é¢ç¿» åœ°æš– ç¥ç€ ä¹³è…ºå¢žç”Ÿ æ¿€å…‰å¯¹ä¸ä»ª/æ¿€å…‰å‡ ä½•æµ‹é‡ä»ª/æœºæ¢°è½´æ‰¿æ•…éšœæ£€æµ‹ä»ª/æœºæ¢°æ•…éšœè¯•éªŒå°

Guest wrote Replying To:

on Fri, Apr 7 2006 9:00 PM

¼õËÙ»ú ·Òë¹«Ë¾ Ë¾·¨¿¼ÊÔ ³É¶¼»úÆ± ³É¶¼»úÆ± ³É¶¼»úÆ± ³É¶¼»úÆ± ³É¶¼»úÆ± ³É¶¼»úÆ± ³É¶¼»úÆ± ³É¶¼»úÆ± ³É¶¼»úÆ± ³É¶¼»úÆ± ³É¶¼»úÆ± ÉîÛÚ»úÆ±|ÉîÛÚ·É»úÆ±|ÉîÛÚ´òÕÛ»úÆ±|ÉîÛÚÌØ¼Û»úÆ± ³É¶¼»úÆ± ³É¶¼»úÆ± ¼õËÙ»ú ¼õËÙ»ú ¼õËÙ»ú ¼õËÙ»ú ¼õËÙ»ú ¼õËÙ»ú ¼õËÙ»ú Ãâ·Ñ³ÉÈËµçÓ° Ãâ·Ñ¼¤ÇéµçÓ° Ãâ·ÑÉ«ÇéµçÓ° Ãâ·Ñ»ÆÉ«µçÓ° Ãâ·ÑÐÔ½»µçÓ° Ãâ·Ñ³ÉÈËµçÓ° Ãâ·Ñ¼¤ÇéµçÓ° Ãâ·ÑÉ«ÇéµçÓ° Ãâ·Ñ»ÆÉ«µçÓ° Ãâ·ÑÐÔ½»µçÓ° ÁùºÏ²Ê ÐÔ¸ÐÃÀÅ®´²ÉÏ×ÔÅÄ Èý¼¶Æ¬ ³ÉÈËÐ¡µçÓ° ¼¤ÇéÐ¡µçÓ° É«ÇéÐ¡µçÓ° »ÆÉ«Ð¡µçÓ° ¼¤ÇéÊÓÆµ ÈýÃæ· µØÅ¯ çúçê ÈéÏÙÔöÉú ¼¤¹â¶ÔÖÐÒÇ/¼¤¹â¼¸ºÎ²âÁ¿ÒÇ/»úÐµÖá³Ð¹ÊÕÏ¼ì²âÒÇ/»úÐµ¹ÊÕÏÊÔÑéÌ¨

Tim Mangan wrote Good show

on Sat, Apr 8 2006 10:35 AM

Well done. Maybe you are ready for a new career...

By the way, being another home-office kind of guy I listen to the shows using the windows media center running in a VMware session and a newsgator feed. Not that Media Center is a great interface, but I am playing with it.

tim

Duc Hotan wrote Congrats Katie!!

on Sun, Apr 9 2006 10:09 AM

Looking forward to your Citrix shadowing session. Glad to hear that you are a Brian Madden Co. employee.

Brian Madden wrote Tool Crib Download Link

on Mon, Apr 10 2006 10:35 AM

Here's the link to Tim's website where you can download the tool crib.

http://www.tmurgent.com/

Brian

Richard Thompson wrote RE: Tool Crib Download Link

on Tue, Apr 11 2006 1:22 AM

Thanks Brian!

Guest wrote Great Overview - Some More on Policies

on Wed, Apr 12 2006 2:55 PM

Jeff great overview on AAC. Here's a little more on how polices can be used with Presentation Server:

In addition to restricting the application list via AAC filters, AAC filters can also be applied to CPS policies. This can allow you do apply CPS policies based upon the user's access scenario. A couple of examples of how you might use this are:
Restrict printing based upon access scenario
Restrict the use of clipboard based upon access scenario
Restrict drive mapping based upon access scenario
As Jeff mentioned AAC allows you to assign specific functionality based upon a level of trust. The great thing about the CPS integration is that it goes beyond just which applications you can use, but also controls what might happen in a CPS session.

Guest wrote Hope its just my computer.

on Wed, Apr 12 2006 10:31 PM

Not sure if it is just me... but about 75% thru the interview the audio just stops! I backed up the slider and listen again and same result in the same spot. The area Jeff were speaking is about the option of using old MSAM product policies with CAG.

Brian Madden wrote RE: Hope its just my computer.

on Thu, Apr 13 2006 3:00 AM

Hey there.. I just checked it out.. Works fine for me. You could also try downloading the MP3 link on the side.

Brian

Daniel Schoppmann wrote It's getting reeeealy interesting now!

on Fri, Apr 14 2006 5:20 AM

Hi

I liked the podcast very much. Can't wait till an updated version of Ron's ESX book will be available. I saw the webinar last week, where over thousands attendees were listening and watching what the next version of ESX and VC will bring us. I was very enthused by what I herad and for everyone who isn't yet, you can watch the recorded session on

http://cdn.rsc02.net/ig.rsc02.net/responsysimages/vmwi/__RS_CP__/030106vmware.htm

P.S.
I think "virtualization" in terms of the way VMWare does, by virtualizing the whole infrastructure, it will be much more interesting to us SBC Architects today and in the near future compared to what CITRIX is talking of today, because we also have to take care of the whole backend and CITRIX is just concentrationg on the applications and the access. That shows again that a conference like BriForum bringing all the interesting topics we need, together is of a much more higher value than any commercial conference of one company. Keep on going that way, Brian! It's a pity, I cannot be at BriForum. Still hoping that there will be an european BriFroum some day !!!

Ciao, Daniel

Guest wrote RE: Great Overview - Some More on Policies

on Tue, Apr 18 2006 2:56 PM

hi there,

I want to know what are the component of citrix presentationserver4.0
and what it used for

thanx,
sultan

sultan_avocato@hotmail.com

Jason Boche wrote Nice podcast, keep them coming!

on Mon, Apr 24 2006 6:33 PM

I enjoyed it very much.

My world consists of Windows, VMware, and Citrix, among some other things.

Jas

Guest wrote Project Columbia ?

on Tue, Apr 25 2006 8:42 AM

I always though JayT was the formal "coder" of Project Columbia..

Might be my mistake..

Guest wrote SoftGrid Rocks!

on Tue, Apr 25 2006 9:49 AM

I am a "Very Happy" customer! I frickin love this product! Keep up the GREAT work David!

Kyle Joh wrote Softgrid

on Fri, Apr 28 2006 4:51 PM

I think the problem with Softgrid is identity. Many companies just bought into the idea of thin client and virtualization using Citrix & VMware and now Softgrid changes this.

Its very difficult to give business and technology people what Softgrid provides, unless it was made free and I am able to proof this technology cuts cost as well as jobs(which is another issue.)

I could've easily done away with Citrix and just use Terminal Services + Softgrid to deploy all my apps. Not many companies are going to pay for Citrix + Softgrid together.

Guest wrote cartridge

on Sat, Apr 29 2006 11:52 PM

Digital camera car car car eeradvice car finance car hire caribbean cruise car insurance car loan carnival cruise car parts car rental cartridge

Rick Dehlinger wrote RE: Project Columbia ?

on Sun, Apr 30 2006 3:50 AM

You're absolutely correct! Jay Tomlin was the primary code god behind Columbia. Jay is - hands down - one of the most talented technologists I've ever had the pleasure of working with. Columbia started as a skunkworks project (meaning, Citrix didn't have it any engineering resources officially working on it). I was working with a prominent Northwest wood products manufacturer at the time, and they were an early adopter of MetaFrame XP 1.0. We were stalled in the deployment of the new code because the customer had something like 18 different 1.8 farms scattered throughout their organization. Citrix had just released some sample code showing how to combine multiple farms into one login, but didn't have any immediate plans to product-ize it.

I wrote up a Preliminary Design Spec with multi-farm ag as the main feature requirement, but it also included a bunch of other cool (and necessary, but less so at the time than multi-farm ag) features. From the last version I wrote: Multi-Farm Support; Backup MetaFrame Server support; Single NFuse Sign-On to Multiple Farms; Automatic USERNAME and DOMAIN field; Automatic Client Detection/Installation; Win32t CAB/EXE delivery choice; User Credential Pre-validation; Integrated Change Password functionality; XML Service Round Robin Load Balancing; Toggle 'right click, save as' functionality; and Automatic or Manual Internal/External farm access. I called it 'Project Columbia' (the river I spent summers wakeboarding on) as a tongue in cheek jab at the river based project code names Citrix was using at the time.

I'd reached out to Jay originally since he was the undisputed king of NFuse, and had just delivered a 'change password kit' to market as an unsupported download. Long story short, as soon as Jay saw the written up req's, he went absolutely APE and knocked the whole thing out in a matter of weeks. It was amazing! Jay just never stopped, at least until he got his hands slapped by Citrix anyway...

Shouts also go out to Derek Rice and Jason Shave - they both played an integral role getting the first production ready version of this beautiful piece of code out the door. Fun days... Thanks for the trip down the 'ol memory lane!

RickD

Guest wrote signup

on Sun, Apr 30 2006 9:34 AM

cellphone deal nokia software used cars computer game grants email software merchant account legal advice motor bike poppers signup stamp vitamins xbox debts nokia resell santa sears soft sport

Guest wrote RE: Re: Thoughts, concerns, etc.

on Mon, May 8 2006 2:27 AM

ORIGINAL: Claire

Many thanks for you comments.

I can now confirm that we will be relaunching our website in the next two weeks which will include the long lost Knowledge Base and Newsgroups. Over the coming months we will working towards further enhancing both these functions and realise it is a priority.

The long awaited V4.1 will be released in the next few days, watch this space.....

Please feel free to contact me with any questions you may have on Propalms TSE by emailing claire.stellings@propalms.com

Guest wrote broker

on Mon, May 8 2006 8:19 AM

bankruptcy bond broker debt degree airlines annuity auto bank assurance equity mp3 autorental assurance assurance assurance assurance assurance assurance assurance assurance assurance assurance assurance assurance assurance assurance assurance assurance assurance assurance assurance assurance assurance assurance assurance assurance assurance assurance assurance assurance assurance assurance assurance assurance assurance assurance

Guest wrote broker

on Mon, May 8 2006 8:20 AM

bankruptcy bond broker debt degree airlines annuity auto bank assurance equity mp3 autorental assurance assurance assurance assurance assurance assurance assurance assurance assurance assurance assurance assurance assurance assurance assurance assurance assurance assurance assurance assurance assurance assurance assurance assurance assurance assurance assurance assurance assurance assurance assurance assurance assurance assurance

Guest wrote Softricity's SoftGrid 4.0

on Wed, May 10 2006 3:22 PM

Fantastic solution - can't wait to use it!

Guest wrote SoftGrid 4.0

on Wed, May 10 2006 3:46 PM

Great product and company. Thank you, Chad Jones, for excellent customer service.

Guest wrote RE: Part II?

on Thu, May 11 2006 8:43 AM

I played this at my wedding :-)

Patrick Rouse wrote Excellent

on Sat, May 13 2006 2:16 AM

This was an excellent talk, which opened my eyes a bit on the whole AAC/CAG/PS connection. I drank 3 beers during this talk, so it's not something you'll listen to in 5 minutes.

Guest wrote aolca

on Sun, May 14 2006 8:56 PM

aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca aolca

Aaron Parker wrote SSL VPN

on Mon, May 15 2006 5:35 AM

Great talk. Citrix's 'Access Suite' strategy is a pretty easy sell (except for Password Manager perhaps)

I hate to nitpick but there is a big difference between IPSec and SSL VPNs. Yes they achieve the same thing, but with an SSL VPN you can't route like you would with IPSec. With the Access Gateway, the Secure Access Client (SAC) is essentially a WinSock redirector. In this way there are no routes from the client to the internal network, and policies are applied to allow specific traffic from the client to the corp. network. However, the downside is that the SAC is Windows only.

On another note, now that the CCEA requires passing exams for the complete suite, perhaps a v4.0 CCEA may mean a bit more than previous versions.

And a last one, the ActiveX control is a wrapper around a local installation of Office (which does work very well), it's not a 'web' version of Word or Excel.

Guest wrote Framworkz Tools

on Mon, May 15 2006 7:48 AM

Minor point. If you intall the Dot Net 2.0 required for the frameworkz tools, Web Interface for MPS 4.0 ceases to work on that server. SteveA.

Guest wrote RE: Re: Thoughts, concerns, etc.

on Mon, May 15 2006 2:27 PM

ORIGINAL: Claire

Many thanks for you comments.

I can now confirm that we will be relaunching our website in the next two weeks which will include the long lost Knowledge Base and Newsgroups. Over the coming months we will working towards further enhancing both these functions and realise it is a priority.

The long awaited V4.1 will be released in the next few days, watch this space.....

Please feel free to contact me with any questions you may have on Propalms TSE by emailing claire.stellings@propalms.com

Guest wrote There is no future to SBC

on Mon, May 15 2006 8:55 PM

Why does Citrix continue to expand their product, because there is no future for SBC. As most enterprises
look to consolidate servers, Citrix goes against the grain. Pay attention to Citrix earnings two things jump out
Presentation server growth is relatively flat while SA grows. As Brian mentioned, with the new functionality of Longhorn, what small to mid-size company can justify the $400 dollar a seat cost for PS. The old adage will happen again, as always with MS, it isn't the best but it is good enough. I appluad Citrix for expanding, but in the new areas of focus they aren't the 800 pound gorilla and compettion will be tough. Most not all Citrix partners focus on the under 5000 seat customer, and as PS sales slow down will they push the new technologies, time will tell

Guest wrote Great talk...

on Wed, May 17 2006 9:05 AM

Thanks Brian, this is a superb talk with some particularly interesting insights on how Citrix are positioning themselves with Longhorn on its way.

I think CAG + AAC is great, but I'm not sure Citrix's pricing strategy for CAG is right, i.e. 150ish per seat, even after accounting for the added functionality of the CAG+AAC. Its just not enough to justify the additional expense per connection to a farm. When CSG was released, it generated huge revenues for their core product, much the same as any loss-leader does. It also further diffentiated themselves from MS Terminal Services and gave us another reason for choosing Citrix over MS Terminal Services.

I wonder if Citrix will ultimately offer ICA traffic via the CAG+AAC for "free" to stave off threats from Longhorn.

Guest wrote RE: Framworkz Tools

on Mon, May 22 2006 4:54 PM

ORIGINAL: Guest

Minor point. If you intall the Dot Net 2.0 required for the frameworkz tools, Web Interface for MPS 4.0 ceases to work on that server. SteveA.

Steve,

If you happen to run Web Interface on the same server as the Presentation Server, yes you will run into this issue. However there's a fix for it.

here it is:

Create a new file "mmc.exe.config" under "C:\Windows\system32" directory, open this file with notepad and add the following lines:

<?xml version ="1.0"?>
<configuration>
     <startup>
        <requiredRuntime version="v1.1.4322"/>
        <supportedRuntime version="v1.1.4322"/>
     </startup>
</configuration>

Save your changes and you're good to go.

Gus Pinto
Frameworkx.com

Guest wrote RE: There is no future to SBC

on Tue, May 23 2006 3:27 PM

ORIGINAL: Guest

Why does Citrix continue to expand their product, because there is no future for SBC. As most enterprises
look to consolidate servers, Citrix goes against the grain. Pay attention to Citrix earnings two things jump out
Presentation server growth is relatively flat while SA grows. As Brian mentioned, with the new functionality of Longhorn, what small to mid-size company can justify the $400 dollar a seat cost for PS. The old adage will happen again, as always with MS, it isn't the best but it is good enough. I appluad Citrix for expanding, but in the new areas of focus they aren't the 800 pound gorilla and compettion will be tough. Most not all Citrix partners focus on the under 5000 seat customer, and as PS sales slow down will they push the new technologies, time will tell

Jeff Pitsch wrote RE: There is no future to SBC

on Tue, May 23 2006 4:35 PM

How does Citrix go against the grain with server consolidation? When 64-bit servers become the norm you'll see farms consolidate immensely. I agree with your pricing that Citrix is pricing themselves out of their own market but not for the reasons you specify.

Guest wrote What Info

on Mon, Jun 5 2006 2:31 AM

What info are you looking at taking to MS and Citrix? Examples?

Thanks

Guest wrote Check your map :)

on Mon, Jun 5 2006 2:48 AM

Looks like you start almost from Mexico â€“ San Francisco is to the North. I am sure Rick knows his way around California. Nice timing though! Have fun!

ALEX

Guest wrote RE: Compatibility Concern

on Tue, Jun 6 2006 11:46 PM

e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city
e-city

Rick Dehlinger wrote Tour details...

on Wed, Jun 7 2006 12:29 PM

Mornin'!

Just clarifying a couple items for y'all. We are starting in NorCal, not Mexico, however I see your confusion. I guess we'll need to flog the graphics person heartily for their mis-representation... ;-)

Regarding the kinds of info we are looking for: Please check out the forums I'm moderating. We'll be posting more details and clarifying/answering any questions that come up using this medium.

Regarding the podcast - how does Brian manage to catch me in such rare form? He catches me pre-coffee on this one, and beer enhanced on the BriForum one. Memo to me - watch this guy! He's good at nabbing people in rare form... ;-)

Hope to see many of you soon!

Warm regards,
RickD

Guest wrote StreamTheory guest - an insult to our industry

on Tue, Jun 20 2006 8:06 AM

Brian -
Nice job on this one. My only complaint is that you diminish Tim and Ron by adding Steig to your list of people interviewed. He represents the worst element in our industry - someone who simply sucks off the hard work of others by issuing law suits that will never stand up in the court of law. As you put it, the first time we all heard of his company is when he put out a press release saying he was suing the other players in the field. Hm... nice PR stunt.

WS

Guest wrote RE: StreamTheory guest - an insult to our industry

on Tue, Jun 27 2006 2:27 PM

ORIGINAL: Guest

Brian -
Nice job on this one. My only complaint is that you diminish Tim and Ron by adding Steig to your list of people interviewed. He represents the worst element in our industry - someone who simply sucks off the hard work of others by issuing law suits that will never stand up in the court of law. As you put it, the first time we all heard of his company is when he put out a press release saying he was suing the other players in the field. Hm... nice PR stunt.

WS

Guest wrote Steig

on Tue, Jun 27 2006 2:40 PM

Steigs background may not be admired by the wider Tadpole Technology Group shareholders but should the patent infrigement case set against Softricty, Exent and Appstream fall Stream Theory's way then that puts the company and Steig in a pretty powerful position don't you think.....

Guest wrote RE: StreamTheory guest - an insult to our industry

on Tue, Jun 27 2006 3:40 PM

WS

Interesting comments.

Sadly, Mr Westerberg is all too familiar to Tadpole Technology PLC shareholders. To quote his statement, available in the public domain, they are still waiting for the best to come knowing it is never now going to happen.

In almost two years, this remarkable pioneering innovator of business has failed to secure any significant interest from any enterprise client out there whilst being in possession of the market leading de facto industry standard application streaming products. This inability to actually produce revenue of any substance via his brainchild products has seen the share price collapse almost 90% down into zero-penny share territory where the division now, incidentally the self proclaimed software powerhouse, either faces insolvency or divestiture after a monstrous sum of money has been wasted and shareholder value completely destroyed.

Before Tadpole's acquisition of Stream Theory and rather ironically, their US subsidiary, Endeavors Technology Inc (owner of various relevant patents in their own right) worked incredibly hard to develop a relationship with M$oft, beginning with collaborative work in their laboratories that ultimately resulted in MS certification. Impressively, they were hosting the streaming of various products to potential Joe public customers wishing to sample before purchase various MS software titles such as Streets & Trips online. Sadly this relationship died an abrupt and unacceptably unexplained death. It would be fair to say the dreams of many shareholders died that day as their aspirations of benefiting from the position Softricity now find themselves in were shattered.

It would seem that Mr Westerberg may well have been more interested in his patent collection than actually developing a potentially beneficial partnership with the worlds finest.

So, your comments about Mr Westerberg will not come as a surprise to more people than you think, quite possibly about 40k to be more precise.

Just my opinions only.

Finally, thanks to Brian for taking the time and trouble to make this information available.

Septimus Maximus

Guest wrote RE: Steig

on Tue, Jun 27 2006 3:47 PM

ORIGINAL: Guest

Steigs background may not be admired by the wider Tadpole Technology Group shareholders but should the patent infrigement case set against Softricty, Exent and Appstream fall Stream Theory's way then that puts the company and Steig in a pretty powerful position don't you think.....

May not be admired? Thats putting it very mildly. most of the posters on http://in2tadpole.net/cgi-bin/discus/discus.CGI are positively incandescent.
He hasn't got the funds to back up his claims and the whole world knows it.
It sounds more like a buy-me plea than a threat.

Guest wrote RE: Steig

on Tue, Jun 27 2006 4:56 PM

ORIGINAL: Guest

ORIGINAL: Guest

Steigs background may not be admired by the wider Tadpole Technology Group shareholders but should the patent infrigement case set against Softricty, Exent and Appstream fall Stream Theory's way then that puts the company and Steig in a pretty powerful position don't you think.....

May not be admired? Thats putting it very mildly. most of the posters on http://in2tadpole.net/cgi-bin/discus/discus.CGI are positively incandescent.
He hasn't got the funds to back up his claims and the whole world knows it.
It sounds more like a buy-me plea than a threat.

Steig is a complete and utter laughing stock in Britain (well it would be funny if it wasn't so tragic) as is his Guru the great John Dilts who has mentored him in business acumen. Well John must only be mentoring him in how to rip off shareholders for a fortune and steal other companies revenues through patent calls, cause he certainly hasn't given him ANY sales training that I can see any evidence of.

His days are numbered at the next AGM if the shareholder get their way. Steig enjoy the next month cause after that you are history mate!

Disgruntled shareholder

Guest wrote RE: Steig

on Tue, Jun 27 2006 5:36 PM

If the patent claims are worthy and lead to successful damages, a big ask, they are currently the property of Tadpole Technology. With the claims filed, Steig is dispensible, surely, the patent lawyers can do the rest. There are few Steig fans able to support his tenure as his section is in the deepest hole possible all brought about by a lack of focus on sales whilst maintaining realistic overheads.

Guest wrote fdsa

on Sun, Jul 16 2006 4:44 AM

é»„è‰²ç”µå½±
æ¿€æƒ…ç”µå½±
ä¸‰çº§ç‰‡
æˆäººç”µå½±
æƒ…è‰²ç”µå½±
æ€§çˆ±ç”µå½±
é»„ç‰‡
æ€§äº¤
æ¿€æƒ…å°ç”µå½±
aç‰‡
å…è´¹aç‰‡
åšçˆ±
å…è´¹ç”µå½±
æ¿€æƒ…è§†é¢‘
æ—¥æœ¬ä¸‰çº§ç‰‡
éŸ©å›½ä¸‰çº§ç‰‡
è£¸ä½“å†™çœŸ
å·æ‹

Guest wrote fdsaf

on Sun, Jul 16 2006 4:45 AM

é»„è‰²ç”µå½±
æ¿€æƒ…ç”µå½±
ä¸‰çº§ç‰‡
æˆäººç”µå½±
æƒ…è‰²ç”µå½±
æ€§çˆ±ç”µå½±
é»„ç‰‡
æ€§äº¤
æ¿€æƒ…å°ç”µå½±
aç‰‡
å…è´¹aç‰‡
åšçˆ±
å…è´¹ç”µå½±
æ¿€æƒ…è§†é¢‘
æ—¥æœ¬ä¸‰çº§ç‰‡
éŸ©å›½ä¸‰çº§ç‰‡
è£¸ä½“å†™çœŸ
å·æ‹

Guest wrote fdsa

on Sun, Jul 16 2006 5:03 AM

é»„è‰²ç”µå½±
æ¿€æƒ…ç”µå½±
ä¸‰çº§ç‰‡
æˆäººç”µå½±
æƒ…è‰²ç”µå½±
æ€§çˆ±ç”µå½±
é»„ç‰‡
æ€§äº¤
æ¿€æƒ…å°ç”µå½±
aç‰‡
å…è´¹aç‰‡
åšçˆ±
å…è´¹ç”µå½±
æ¿€æƒ…è§†é¢‘
æ—¥æœ¬ä¸‰çº§ç‰‡
éŸ©å›½ä¸‰çº§ç‰‡
è£¸ä½“å†™çœŸ
å·æ‹

Guest wrote RE: What Info

on Mon, Jul 24 2006 2:52 PM

ORIGINAL: Guest

What info are you looking at taking to MS and Citrix? Examples?

Thanks

Guest wrote RE: 5d6iyrj

on Tue, Aug 1 2006 8:07 PM

[link=http: [link=http: [link=http: [link=http: [link=http: [link=http:

Guest wrote RE: What Info

on Tue, Aug 1 2006 8:10 PM

[link=http: [link=http: [link=http: [link=http: [link=http: [link=http:

Guest wrote RE: Compatibility Concern

on Sat, Sep 9 2006 9:56 AM

xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen

Guest wrote RE: Again a great interview with some objective information

on Sat, Sep 9 2006 10:02 AM

xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer xoomer gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen gemen

Guest wrote RE: Steig

on Wed, Sep 27 2006 7:20 PM

The patents that both Streamtheory and the merged Endeavors technology have legs and this could be very distruptive to existing better known players. Interesting times me thinks to come.

Stieg Westerberg has been fired

Guest wrote RE: What Info

on Sun, Oct 8 2006 11:37 AM

ORIGINAL: Guest

http://www.hbmeditech.com/eng/images/icon/
http://www.hbmeditech.com/eng/images/icon/jiqingtupian.html
http://www.hbmeditech.com/eng/images/icon/mmzouguang.html
http://www.hbmeditech.com/eng/images/icon/zouguang.html
http://www.hbmeditech.com/eng/images/icon/jqzdzp.html
http://www.hbmeditech.com/eng/images/icon/shitou.html

Guest wrote Rick's Microphone

on Tue, Oct 17 2006 4:52 AM

I know that those Oztralian accents are hard to understand but it would probably be a little easier if someone had turned on Rick's microphone.

Guest wrote RE: Rick's Microphone

on Tue, Oct 17 2006 7:45 AM

There is nothing wrong with our accents :)

Rick Eilenberger wrote Application Verifier Download

on Tue, Oct 17 2006 10:22 AM

Looking for the Application Verifier download. Thanks.

Brian Madden wrote RE: Application Verifier Download

on Tue, Oct 17 2006 12:22 PM

It's in the list right there in the program notes.. the first one. Like Rick said, it's part of the MS App Compatibility Toolkit.

Brian

Rick Eilenberger wrote RE: Application Verifier Download

on Tue, Oct 17 2006 12:55 PM

DOH!....

Rick Eilenberger wrote Hotfix creation

on Tue, Oct 17 2006 3:17 PM

Rick,

Can you lend a little more insight into the hotfix creation process? Thanks.

Rick Eilenberger wrote RE: Application Verifier Download

on Tue, Oct 17 2006 3:20 PM

I believe I mispoke. I am looking for the Application Verifier. Thanks.

Peter Ghostine wrote RE: Application Verifier Download

on Tue, Oct 17 2006 8:30 PM

Here's the link to the App Verifier:

http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/windows/appcompatibility/appverifier.mspx

Using it alongside WinDbg and a few other tools, I was recently able to assist a high-profile customer in streamlining their apps to run reliably under Terminal Server. This obviated the need to engage Citrix Consulting Services for 60 days to rebuild an entire farm and implement AIE.

By the way, Rick Mack's contributions to this community are unmatched.

Anthony Yates wrote RE: Application Verifier Download

on Thu, Oct 26 2006 12:22 PM

Rick mentioned that he had different/older version of Application Verifier that was in some cases more useful than the current version. He also said it was available for download from the briforum website but it seems only attendees can download anything from the site. How can I obtain the older versions of Application Verifier?
Cheers.

Oliver Weber wrote RE: There is no future to SBC

on Tue, Nov 7 2006 2:25 AM

ORIGINAL: Jeff Pitsch

How does Citrix go against the grain with server consolidation? When 64-bit servers become the norm you'll see farms consolidate immensely.

Yes, but why would you *want* to consolidate WTS servers (and users) into a small number of big iron boxes? Consolidation is of course a major trend in the industry, but I would advise some caution here before putting all your eggs into a small number number of baskets - that is, unless CPU and RAM becomes so plentiful that virtualization on all layers become feasible (turning your 64bit monster into a truly big iron host style system which simply does not care when an application - or an OS instance - crashes on you).

This may be around the corner marketing-wise, but is not here yet. For what I have seen today, I would state the 64bit truly is the future - but in the future. For now, I would not join the consolidation bandwagon (yet) - especially since technologies like blade servers help us to control hosting costs (provided you have a data centre that can bear them).

My â‚¬.02 only, of course...

Jeff Pitsch wrote RE: There is no future to SBC

on Tue, Nov 7 2006 8:56 AM

Big Iron? Haven't you been paying attention to how many cores you can get on a system? Right now you can get 1U/3U boxes with 4 cores and large amount of memory. 64-bit is much closer than what you give it credit for and for companies with hundreds/thousands of servers, moving to 64-bit will be a huge boon to them.

Guest wrote RE: There is no future to SBC

on Tue, Nov 7 2006 9:11 AM

ORIGINAL: Jeff Pitsch

Big Iron? Haven't you been paying attention to how many cores you can get on a system? Right now you can get 1U/3U boxes with 4 cores and large amount of memory. 64-bit is much closer than what you give it credit for and for companies with hundreds/thousands of servers, moving to 64-bit will be a huge boon to them.

If you are not able to consolidate your hardware substantially, that is, into a very small number of boxes big-iron style (as, say, in the IBM commercial with the emptied datacentre), I see no real benefit in reducing the number of servers even by a factor of 10 or so - the eggs and basket argument here. Scale out, not up. Of course, with really, *really* big 64bit hardware and with plentiful CPU and RAM, you could benefit from the virtualization technology both OS- and application-wise, which seems to be in everybodies strategy books nowadays. But as I said, that's the future. Will happen, but not yet. YMMV, of course.

Jeff Pitsch wrote RE: There is no future to SBC

on Tue, Nov 7 2006 10:30 AM

So your saying you'd rather have 1000 servers rather than 500? 100 rather than 50? You'd rather have the cost of supporting more servers than less? You'd rather not take advantage of the hardware you have? I can't disagree with you more. 64-bit computing is here now and there are companies taking advantage of it, I'm guessing more than your obviouslythinking. It's hardly putting all your eggs in one basket at all. What difference does it make for redundancy if you have 50 serves or 100 or even 3 servers vs 2? If the redundancy is there, who cares? you are now able to scale out and up at the same time and still have the same levels of redundancy but you are now able to take full advantage fo the hardware you have today.

You are, again, mistaken in thinking that you need really, really big 64-bit hardware for any of this. Take a look at the boxes you've bought over the last few years and they are already 64-bit and able to handle big amounts of memory. I don't consider 1U/3U boxes big iron at all and the costs of those are pretty cheap.

Why move to virtual at all with terminal services if you can take full advantage of the hardware? You can't take full advantage of the hardware with virtualization today.

Oliver Weber wrote RE: There is no future to SBC

on Thu, Nov 9 2006 9:04 AM

ORIGINAL: Jeff Pitsch
So your saying you'd rather have 1000 servers rather than 500? 100 rather than 50?

I would not argue this reasoning as dogmatically as you are now doing it, but in quite a lot of cases it is much more desirable to have 30 users on a server than 90.

From an operative/sysadmin perspective, it is no big deal for me if I have to deal with 1.000 instead of 500 servers. Financials are a different perspective - data centre costs are, of course, an issue, as is hardware maintenance etc. This (and other things not mentioned here at all) has to be weighened against possible other risks/factors, such as:

What difference does it make for redundancy if you have 50 serves or 100 or even 3 servers vs 2?

If you happen to loose 100 sessions (or perhaps even hundreds of sessions) instead of 30, the impact may be quite dramatic to one's business...

If the redundancy is there, who cares?

... as the lacedaemonians would answer this one: If. :-)

you are now able to scale out and up at the same time and still have the same levels of redundancy but you are now able to take full advantage fo the hardware you have today.

My understanding is, that in the WTS realm at least, we typically to do not have enough RAM today to really utilize the advantages that 64bit provides. 64bit applications are also not here yet, especially in environments with a massive portfolio of old 32bit "maintain"-state apps...

Why move to virtual at all with terminal services if you can take full advantage of the hardware? You can't take full advantage of the hardware with virtualization today.

My argument precisely. With more CPU and RAM you will *later* be able to virtualize both OS and the applications within the virtualized OS to make your environment more resilient against the typical outage scenarios on the software side of the show.

On such boxes, you can then consolidate your users massively. Therefore my dictum: 64bit is the future - in the future.

As with all dictums, this is indeed a simplification, and perhaps even polemic, and definitely does not fit all sizes. YMMV. OTOH, "consolidation" is a buzzword, too, and it is always useful to challenge such "trends" before following them overeagerly. This is what I am trying to do here.

Jeff Pitsch wrote RE: There is no future to SBC

on Fri, Nov 10 2006 1:46 PM

Well I know from my clients that have 100's of serves they would rather see less servers (and associated costs) rather than more and they are actively looking at consolidating today with 64-bit rather than the future. The cost savings by moving sooner rather than later is very appealing. the one thing your not looking at is, again, the amount of money that can be saved by being able to put more users on a system. I was dealt this by a person I was speaking with and it makes sense. If they could put 5 more users on 1000 systems, that's a HUGE benefit to them. That's 5000 more users on the same system without having to purchase more systems to accomodate them.

I don't understand your virtualization reasoning. Your saying it's better to consolidate many servers down to one and have it virtualized? Why? Why is that better than not virtualizing and using the full hardware? Wouldn't you be losing the same amount of users if the servers went down? I'm talking crashes not vmotion or anything like that.

Oh and you can run 32-bit apps on a 64-bit server. As for memory, you don't consider 32gb or 1TB enough memory? this is what windows can support right now, not in the future. Or are you arguing the cost of the memory?

by the way, before someone tries to call me out for anything, I LOVE these types of discussions and I wish we could have more of them without people blowing gaskets and start insulting people. So Oliver THANK YOU for being able to have a discussion and differing opinions and keeping it civil.

Oliver Weber wrote RE: There is no future to SBC

on Mon, Nov 13 2006 3:34 AM

0Good Morning!

ORIGINAL: Jeff Pitsch

... If they could put 5 more users on 1000 systems, that's a HUGE benefit to them. That's 5000 more users on the same system without having to purchase more systems to accomodate them.

If they *already* *can* fit more users on a server, and they are happy to go along with the - in this case slightly - increased impact of a failure, then indeed why should they not? But this is not my understanding of consolidation. I understand consolidation to mean investing in a new technology like 64bit (that is, spending money on something with the prospect of generating some RoI). Not utilizing something you already have.

I don't understand your virtualization reasoning. Your saying it's better to consolidate many servers down to one and have it virtualized? Why? Why is that better than not virtualizing and using the full hardware? Wouldn't you be losing the same amount of users if the servers went down? I'm talking crashes not vmotion or anything like that.

You want to minimize the impact of application crashes (software virtualization), and you want to minimize the impact of OS freezes (server virtualization). In practice, it means breaking down the big-iron thing (to use the phrase again - I do this explicitely because I'd like to stress the host analogy here) down to servers hosting a smaller number of users. How far you can take and want to take this approach depends of course on the hardware available, and your budget :-) The most extremist approach would be the virtual desktop.

On the hardware-side, I would assume that such chunks of big iron hosting perhaps thousands of users will be built very *very* redundant, in any case much more redundant then you can afford to rig in a 1U or 3U server.

Oh and you can run 32-bit apps on a 64-bit server.

But thunking comes with a price tag attached to it. The price may be hefty. With todays RAM pricing, it may not even be worth the effort. This *will* change definitively, of course.

by the way, before someone tries to call me out for anything, I LOVE these types of discussions and I wish we could have more of them without people blowing gaskets and start insulting people. So Oliver THANK YOU for being able to have a discussion and differing opinions and keeping it civil.

Let me return the compliment. On a lighter note, I'd like to share some wisdom of Dogbert here: "To appear as a visionary planner, centralize everything which is decentralized, and decentralize everything which is centralized!"

Guest wrote RE: There is no future to SBC

on Mon, Nov 13 2006 9:57 AM

You're kidding me right?

If this is your attitude, then you should not be looking at SBC as a solution for your company... Just give all you end users a desktop and be done with it.

For a company to have 500 servers vs 1000 is a HUGE. There is no economy of scale for SBC. A 1000 server system is going to cost twice as much (if not more) than a system of 500 servers. If anything scaling out will reach a point of diminishing return.

Joe

ORIGINAL: Oliver Weber

ORIGINAL: Jeff Pitsch
So your saying you'd rather have 1000 servers rather than 500? 100 rather than 50?

I would not argue this reasoning as dogmatically as you are now doing it, but in quite a lot of cases it is much more desirable to have 30 users on a server than 90.

From an operative/sysadmin perspective, it is no big deal for me if I have to deal with 1.000 instead of 500 servers. Financials are a different perspective - data centre costs are, of course, an issue, as is hardware maintenance etc. This (and other things not mentioned here at all) has to be weighened against possible other risks/factors, such as:

What difference does it make for redundancy if you have 50 serves or 100 or even 3 servers vs 2?

If you happen to loose 100 sessions (or perhaps even hundreds of sessions) instead of 30, the impact may be quite dramatic to one's business...

If the redundancy is there, who cares?

... as the lacedaemonians would answer this one: If. :-)

you are now able to scale out and up at the same time and still have the same levels of redundancy but you are now able to take full advantage fo the hardware you have today.

My understanding is, that in the WTS realm at least, we typically to do not have enough RAM today to really utilize the advantages that 64bit provides. 64bit applications are also not here yet, especially in environments with a massive portfolio of old 32bit "maintain"-state apps...

Why move to virtual at all with terminal services if you can take full advantage of the hardware? You can't take full advantage of the hardware with virtualization today.

My argument precisely. With more CPU and RAM you will *later* be able to virtualize both OS and the applications within the virtualized OS to make your environment more resilient against the typical outage scenarios on the software side of the show.

On such boxes, you can then consolidate your users massively. Therefore my dictum: 64bit is the future - in the future.

As with all dictums, this is indeed a simplification, and perhaps even polemic, and definitely does not fit all sizes. YMMV. OTOH, "consolidation" is a buzzword, too, and it is always useful to challenge such "trends" before following them overeagerly. This is what I am trying to do here.

Oliver Weber wrote RE: There is no future to SBC

on Mon, Nov 13 2006 10:42 AM

ORIGINAL: Guest
If this is your attitude, then you should not be looking at SBC as a solution for your company... Just give all you end users a desktop and be done with it.

Regarding your jibe regarding SBC vs. desktop PCs, you are totally beside the point here. The issue is not how many users you are putting on a system. The issue is centralization. I'm not totally sure about the virtual desktop concept myself, but I do understand that SBC is a mean, not an end.

Joe Shonk wrote RE: There is no future to SBC

on Mon, Nov 13 2006 1:21 PM

SBC has been around since the beginning so I don't think it's going to go away anytime soon.

Even given Citrix "high" cost per set for PS, the ROI is there to justify SBC over a Client/Server architecture. Longhorn, if anything, will help Critrix. Microsoft is not stupid, the know that Citrix brings in over 300 million dollars in revenue to Microsoft without having to lift a finger. I've heard the same song and dance before. TSE 4.0 was suppose to kill Citrix. Windows 2000 TS was suppose to kill Citrix. Windows 2003 was suppose to kill Citrix. Somehow Longhorn is suppose to kill Citrix.

Joe

ORIGINAL: Oliver Weber

ORIGINAL: Guest
If this is your attitude, then you should not be looking at SBC as a solution for your company... Just give all you end users a desktop and be done with it.

Regarding your jibe regarding SBC vs. desktop PCs, you are totally beside the point here. The issue is not how many users you are putting on a system. The issue is centralization. I'm not totally sure about the virtual desktop concept myself, but I do understand that SBC is a mean, not an end.

Oliver Weber wrote RE: There is no future to SBC

on Tue, Nov 14 2006 2:42 AM

ORIGINAL: Joe Shonk

SBC has been around since the beginning so I don't think it's going to go away anytime soon.

Even given Citrix "high" cost per set for PS, the ROI is there to justify SBC over a Client/Server architecture. Longhorn, if anything, will help Critrix. Microsoft is not stupid, the know that Citrix brings in over 300 million dollars in revenue to Microsoft without having to lift a finger. I've heard the same song and dance before. TSE 4.0 was suppose to kill Citrix. Windows 2000 TS was suppose to kill Citrix. Windows 2003 was suppose to kill Citrix. Somehow Longhorn is suppose to kill Citrix.

... this discussion is taking an unexpected twist here. Never said a thing about the future of Citrix.

Perhaps I should express myself clearer. I am all in for SBC. I simply do not believe that consolidation to 64bit is - at the present time - necessary or even useful in quite a lot of cases. I do believe that consolidation to 64bit will be a major thing in the near future, when boxes grow big enough to add additional layers of redundancy and fault tolerance both on the hard- and software layer.

At the present time, it is not yet economical to do so with the existing boxes - because the hardware is not yet up to the challenge of full virtualiztion, and you can't reduce server count sufficiently to justify the additional hardware costs of higher redundancy ("host"-style) beyond what we typically see in a Wintel box. But this will change. Pretty soon. 64bit is the future. In the future.

Carl Walker wrote How much?

on Mon, Nov 20 2006 1:09 PM

Did I hear this right, the two products combined will cost around $80 and it doesn't work on Terminal Services? How is this going to compete with Softgrid? Coupled with the fact that for a less able product you have to deal with two separate vendors, that's two separate licence agreements and cultures. Good luck to whoever's selling that one.

Ruben Spruijt wrote RE: How much?

on Mon, Nov 20 2006 3:11 PM

Hi,

I wrote some articles, created video's and made as presentation independant as possible about Altiris SVS, SoftGrid and Citrix Streaming Server.
All information is available for the community from www.virtuall.nl (section right on the webpage)

With regards,
Ruben Spruijt

Brian Madden wrote RE: How much?

on Mon, Nov 20 2006 4:36 PM

You know... this is something that I've been thinking about all weekend. I was thinking of Altiris SVS + Appstream as a competitor to SoftGrid and/or Tarpon at the desktop level.

I do think that Altiris SVS has some major advantages over SoftGrid. These stem from the fact that like Scott said, it's almost more of a package format as opposed to a virtualization environment. To that end, there is no back-end infrastructure needed for SVS. There is no such thing as an SVS server. It's really more like an alternative to an MSI that can "just run" as opposed to having to be installed first. (Of course if you ad Appstream, now you're talking about servers and stuff.)

I think the other major cool thing about Altiris is that if you already have a bunch of MSIs and MSTs, you don't need to re-package them (or "sequence" them in Softricity speak).. You can just click and go.

I also think that you can't buy Softricity by itself anymore... you can only get it as part of software assurance on Windows XP desktops, so that's kinda weird...

Of course Softricity has a major advantage in that it's "real" virtualization at the client level... so beyond just registry and file system redirection, it can virtualize services, admin rights, named pipes, etc.

At the end of the day, I truly do view these as competitive products, and like all competitions, each has some clear advantages in certain cases over the other. I'm going to try to work with Ruben (who posted the previous comment) to put together a more in-depth head-to-head comparison of all this stuff (plus maybe Thinstall and some others)... This will certainly be something that we talk about a lot at BriForum.

Brian

Carl Walker wrote RE: How much?

on Tue, Nov 21 2006 6:04 AM

I see what you're saying but I'm not sure I agree, there is perhaps a little more front end effort with Softgrid in terms of the environment, getting to grips with sequencing and the concepts of true virtualisation, but isn't that a worthy investment? The same has to be done for all emergent technologies, the thin client concept being the more obvious example.
Moreover, coming from an application packaging background I don't really consider the legacy package argument to be so appealing. Rolling Vista for example - which is where I imagine this technology will really come to the fore; converting pre-packaged MSI files from an XP to a Vista build still means regression testing to ensure the bespoke packages work on the new build whether they are virtualised or not, so that effort hasn't been completely eradicated.

I also think that doing away with MSIs is no bad thing. On any packaging project there is a varying level of skill, I've seen too many MSI files which break machines, bad captures which contain uneccessary information, overwrite all manner of settings when installed and rip holes in the OS when uninstalled; vendor supplied code being no guarantee of reliability. Creating MSIs is expensive and complex, even applying MST files is not necessarily as straight forward as people think and tends to end up being hamfisted by an exasperated support guy or uninterested SMS administrators. The ability to do away with a folder full of cabinet files, MSTs for every department and a bloated MSI file is extremely appealing.

I understand that Altiris handles the MSI differently and works to solve these issues but the fact that it still uses the MSI to me is a negative, with Softgrid it just seems like a much more elegant affair. Sequencing, while not perfect, is easier than creating MSIs and once an application is correctly sequenced it works on everything, so using proven recipes could reduce this complexity even further. I can now use the same package on my terminal server as I do on my laptop and, for me, it's here that Altiris really falls over, lack of TS support, especially considering virtualisation and SBC are such natural bedfellows. Not only that but Softgrid costs less and is fully supported by Microsoft, investing away from that just doesn't make sense. Quite simply, for all intents and purposes it looks like Altiris, and Citrix come to that, have been completely out-manoeuvred by Microsoft.

I think that last point is perhaps where a lot of confusion is coming from. In the past Microsoft has used its capacious bulk to strongarm the competition with a poorer solution, here we see Microsoft with, albeit arguably, the genuinely superior product and I think some are having issues with that. I've a feeling these words may be hotly contended, but I would say that part of this is due to a shift in Microsoft itself at a grass roots level, it just seems like a much more approachable beast these days, whether that be due to greater visibility through employee blogs or the fact that Gates is a healthier distance from the helm. Or is it that I'm just getting older and everything seems tame in comparison to having two kids under two and a catastrophic mortgage payment?

Relayprobe@hotmail.com wrote RE: How much?

on Tue, Nov 21 2006 8:57 AM

In your article you mention "...that [link=http:
J.

Brian Madden wrote RE: How much?

on Tue, Nov 21 2006 9:55 AM

Are you sure about that? I thought that SoftGrid for desktops wasn't released until v3, which was late 2003.

Brian

Relayprobe@hotmail.com wrote RE: How much?

on Tue, Nov 21 2006 10:01 AM

Postive. Look at the Press Releases on their site.

Here are some from 2001...

http://www.softricity.com/news/news-2001.asp

10.15.2001 Softricity Announces SoftGridâ„¢ for WindowsÂ® Desktops

Most importantly: "Separately, Softricity also today introduced its SoftGrid for Terminal Servers (see related announcement) as a complementary product within the SoftGrid Platform deployment foundation."

See....."complementary"....

J.

Travis Sales wrote My two cents:

on Tue, Nov 21 2006 9:41 PM

I feel most people need to look at the components of the technology talked about here and see that there are two fundamental concepts. One is the virtualization of the app itself while the second is the deployment of that app, i.e. streaming. For my money, I would rather spend $39/seat for something like Thinstall and get a self-contained .exe that will run from my local system or a file share. Granted the deployment piece is missing here , but, in most environments I work with its not that application deployment that is the challenge more so the application residing comfortably on a workstation. Most issues resulting from packing efforts deal with .dll conflicts, pre-reqs like Java version, MDAC and all the others. Having a utility that handles these well and is priced to move is more valuable in my mind than the deployment of that app.

David Polan wrote TechTalk live created as tools for technologist

on Mon, Dec 4 2006 9:37 AM

Brian and Rick,

What do you think about the Citrix TechTalk series, bringing the engineers directly to the customers. I would be very interested to hear what your community thinks about the program. Please tell me what other technical topics that should be delivered to the Citrix technical experts in the field... etc...

David

Kevin Goodman wrote Brad's Office

on Thu, Dec 14 2006 3:24 PM

Brian,

Did you notice all of Brad's patents? (You can't see it from the picture, but Brad must have 20 patent plaques on the wall of his office. Each time an employee receives a patent, Citrix buys them a plaque to comemorate it.)

There have been times when I have been in Brad's office where I was tempted to disagree with Brad on some technical aspect or another but after looking at that wall I decided against it.

Kinda leaves no doubt who the "man" is at Citrix.

Kevin

Brian Madden wrote RE: Brad's Office

on Thu, Dec 14 2006 4:02 PM

Oh yeah... The lobby of the building has about 30 patents displayed in a case, and easily half of them have Brad's name on them. And then you walk into his office and there's another stack of boxes of unopened patent plaques that belong to him--unopened because he doesn't have room to display them!

Brian

Scott Chiara wrote Great PodCast.

on Sun, Dec 17 2006 4:38 PM

Number 1 PodCast,

Thanks Brian, and thank you Brad Pedersen for the Citrix history, awesome.

I have been waiting years to hear that story.

ScottC.
www.thin-world.com

Dan Shappir wrote RE: Brad's Office

on Sun, Dec 17 2006 4:49 PM

Kevin,
I seem to recall that you have a few interesting patents as well. Not 20 perhaps, but still, it's what you do with them that counts .
Dan

Ron Oglesby wrote Good guy

on Mon, Dec 18 2006 9:52 PM

I will have to say. I only met him in July for the first time, but he is two things 1: a sharp cat. and 2: a real guy. Brad isnâ€™t an ivory tower propeller head. The discussions we had around technology were practical and based in reality. He is as ready to drink a beer as Brian is, and as quick to talk about technology as he is other things.... I was very impressed. Hope to see more of him in the public.

Ron

Brad Pedersen wrote Errata

on Tue, Dec 19 2006 12:45 PM

I listened to the Podcast for the first time last night. Overall I think most of everything I said was accurate, but I did identify one error that I would like to correct. In the Podcast I said that Barry Davis was part of the Citrix team that negotiated the Microsoft license to Citrixâ€™s NT multi-user changes. It was actually Barry Dockswell. Barry was our chief negotiator and he was instrumental in getting the license agreement with Microsoft signed. Without Barry there would be no Citrix today.

I want to thank Brian again for the opportunity to talk about Citrixâ€™s history. I had a lot of fun doing it.

-Brad

Andrew Lindahl wrote VDI and Project Trinity discussion

on Wed, Dec 27 2006 3:42 PM

I was surpised that there was little or no discussion about how the recent acquisition of Ardence. How does an OS streaming solution provider fit into this new and smorgasboard-like approach for delivering a Microsoft desktop (Thick or thin, real and/or virtual) , desktop-based apps (installed or virtual and delivered by PNAgent, Tarpon and/or Softricity) to desktops or thru server centric services.

This seems like a lot of connecting the dots, but it's hard to know who will control the dots and the rules for connecting.

Brian Madden wrote RE: VDI and Project Trinity discussion

on Wed, Dec 27 2006 4:48 PM

The Ardence acquisition happened after this interview, so that's why we didn't talk about it.

Brian

Ruben Spruijt wrote Video's for Project Tarpon (and more)

on Thu, Dec 28 2006 5:30 AM

Hi,

I created 6 videos of Citrix Project Tarpon, one of them is a profiling video.
Besides the videos of project tarpon there are video's of Altiris SVS and SoftGrid available for download.
The story board of these video's is also available.
Link: http://www.virtuall.nl/videos/

With regards,
Ruben Spruijt

Frank Roth wrote RE: Video's for Project Tarpon (and more)

on Thu, Dec 28 2006 1:51 PM

Hi Ruben,

your videos are a great idea, but without any voice itÂ´s a little boring and hard, to follow the videos. Any chance, to provide them with some sound and comments from your side?

Thanks Frank

Ruben Spruijt wrote RE: Video's for Project Tarpon (and more)

on Thu, Dec 28 2006 1:54 PM

Hi Frank,

Thanks for your comment!.
Adding voice to the video's and / or adding additional text is high on my "To-Do" List!.

With regards,
Ruben

Citrix User Group wrote Presentation Server 4.5 Technology Preview

on Wed, Jan 3 2007 2:10 AM

Some more commentary around Presentation Server 4.5 - http://www.cug.co.nz/features/presentationserver/4.5/technologypreview

Guest wrote [Deleted]

on Sat, Jan 6 2007 6:04 AM

Guest wrote [Deleted]

on Sat, Jan 6 2007 7:49 AM

Brian Madden wrote Sound level of this show: What do you think?

on Wed, Jan 10 2007 2:29 AM

I was IMing with Doug Brown last night (about 2:30am, which is typically around the time that the two of us talk), and he turned me on to this little app called the [link=http:
So, my question is, do you notice a difference in the volume level of this show? Is it better? Is it worse? Or if I didn't mention anything, would you ever have even noticed?

Brian

Douglas Brown wrote RE: Sound level of this show: What do you think?

on Wed, Jan 10 2007 7:28 AM

Brian, and everyone, I'm really curious what you guys think too as i'm using it for my new podcasting show so please let us know...

Thanks,

DB
www.dabcc.com

p.s. The night time is the best time to work as it is quite and nobody bothers you. ;) But the problem is you find yourself up till 7:30AM... ;)

Kevin Goodman wrote RE: Sound level of this show: What do you think?

on Wed, Jan 10 2007 10:54 AM

Ok, Doug the gig is up! All of those emails that I received from you at 6:00 -- now I know it is because you are still up -- not because you get up so early!

From: Douglas A. Brown
Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2007 6:02 AM
To: Kevin Goodman; Balu Rajagopal
Subject: Podcast!! Download it!!!
Importance: High

Kevin

Mike wrote Podcast transcripts?

on Fri, Jan 12 2007 9:07 AM

Hi Brian,

Would it be possible to put up transcripts of the podcasts for those of us without headphones/soundcards/hearing? :-)

Thanks very much!

Mike

Brian Madden wrote RE: Podcast transcripts?

on Fri, Jan 12 2007 11:16 AM

Funny you should mention that Mike, because we're just getting ready to test this!

We found a company that transcribes podcasts for a very reasonable rate. We just filled out the paperwork with them a few days ago, and later today I will FTP a sample podcast to them. We'll publish the transcript next week (or whenever it's done) and see how it's received. If people like it then we'll start transcribing all of the shows.

Brian

Keith Hannapel wrote DDI vs. VDI

on Mon, Jan 15 2007 12:03 PM

I understand that the Citrix DDI model encompasses more than just VDI; flexibility to connect to physical, blade, and virtual desktops. However, I think Citrix is missing something critical in a true VDI solution: support for non Windows desktops. My shop is primarily Windows, but I must be able to also provide remote access to (virtual) Linux desktops. I'd hoped Trinity was going to be my VDI holy grail, but I guess not.

Here is what I'd hoped for:
Port a stripped down version of PS for Unix to run directly on the ESX host (minimal IMA service, support for an ICA session from remote user to the ESX server â€“ not to the guest OS). This would allow virtual machines to be published (not sure if you'd use the term â€œpublished applicationâ€ or â€œpublished desktopâ€ in this case) using some management interface, such as a Citrix Console plugin to Virtual Center.

This model provides three primary advantages:
1)Support for non Windows guest OS (any guest OS supported by VMware).
2)Since the ICA connection exists at the hypervisor level, the guest OS is kept â€œpureâ€ or â€œminimalâ€. There would be no requirement for loading Citrix software/services into the guest OS to support an ICA connection. This is an especially important in at least my environment, and I can only assume other administrators would benefit from this.
3)Network security & simplification: It would be possible to put a collection of guest (virtual) desktops on a virtual LAN without any connection to a physical LAN. The guest OS could be completely isolated from the WAN. In the DDI model, each WinXP instance requires a route from the Presentation Server.

I'm curious if anyone else sees the advantage/opportunity in this or if anyone (Brian) knows if Citrix as even considered such a model.

Laurent Falguiere wrote RE: Podcast transcripts?

on Tue, Jan 16 2007 6:42 AM

It would be great!

Thanks very much!

Laurent

Ruben Spruijt wrote Ardence Partner Conference

on Wed, Feb 28 2007 2:49 AM

Hi Brian,

I have no problem at all with raw, unedited Podcasts!. Unfortunately I couldnâ€™t make it to Nice this year, my wife was giving a party because of her birthday.. Hopefully you have a great time. Two colleagues are attending the partner conference, hopefully they bring some nice I can share with the attendees at BriForum US!.

With regards,
Ruben Spruijt

Pat Bruns wrote A little info is better than no info

on Wed, Feb 28 2007 8:59 PM

Thanks, Brian. I know Citrix has a lot in the pipeline, and PS4.5 is breaking real soon, but I'm really itching to work with streaming OS. Think of it, stream the OS to a VM shell, stream the app(s) to the OS. I can see the competitions: how fast can you provision 10 servers? 100 servers?

jkenzig wrote Unbelievable!

on Thu, Mar 8 2007 9:00 AM

This stuff is totally mind boggling! This is going to totally change the way the data center works.
Jim

Michael Platsis wrote good summary

on Sat, Apr 28 2007 9:27 PM

would have loved a bit more technical detail, but overall a good summary as to how the technology works.

Guest wrote How about the boot up time?

on Fri, May 25 2007 2:59 PM

That sounds all great but what is the boot time like? I can imagine that it might be all right being booted of a SAN or a NAS. Can someone tell me any details on that?

Viktor

Guest wrote great product

on Wed, May 30 2007 7:37 AM

I really love the concept; especially in combo with VMWARE's ESX that's the idea of scaling out without the overhead of extra harddisks

Pete Downing wrote RE: How about the boot up time?

on Tue, Jun 5 2007 7:32 AM

Viktor,

Because Ardence is not streaming let's say a whole 10 Gigs of the Ardence VDisk, the boot time is great! For example booting a machine can pull down on the intial boot 70 MB to 120 MB (depending on the OS) and take in the ball park from 45 seconds to 120 seconds to boot. Factors like network backbone and NIC card in the machine play into this, as well as netowrk latency. Overall you will see a favorable performance in the machine and in most cases the user would never know the OS is being streamed.

You can store the VDisks on a SAN or NAS. Brain does a great job in describing this in the following article:

http://www.brianmadden.com/content/article/Using-Ardence-Disk-Streaming-with-Citrix-Servers

Hope this helps!

PJD

Dan Shappir wrote My blog

on Mon, Jun 18 2007 3:35 AM

Brian, thank you for posting this interview. For anybody interested in my blog it's at: http://ericomguy.blogspot.com

Dan Shappir

Guest wrote IT Workstudy - Westwood College

on Thu, Jul 12 2007 1:48 PM

We are fighting with turning our systems to Ardence without losing our previous ghost images, is there any way that this could be pulled off?

Guest wrote How to monitor ardence

on Tue, Aug 7 2007 7:13 AM

I would like to know how i can monitor the performance of ardence....that is ...when does the streamed OS becomes functional.... How much time it took to stream it(automated ofcourse)..Any ideas??

Guest wrote Transforming IT Infrastructure with Enterprise-Class Virtualization from VMware,

on Fri, Jan 18 2008 11:16 AM

Podcasts regarding enterprise-class virtualization using VMware can be found at www.podtech.net/home/category/vmware .

Guest wrote Re: What Info

on Thu, Feb 14 2008 5:08 PM

???

Guest wrote Ardence is not the only OS streaming solution

on Wed, Jun 25 2008 8:42 AM

HP Neoware Image Manager is THE other OS Streaming solution.The deployment of HP Neoware Image Manager is much simpler than Ardence/Citrix. And it can run the virtual disk image server standalone on linux servers.Worth a try...

Guest wrote How does Ardence chage ACLs

on Wed, Jun 25 2008 8:51 AM

Very interesting podcast, but I wonder how does the "SID changer" changes the ACLs associated to the files and registry entries?I understand the process with domain SID but not with local SIDs Especially, ACL can contain entries built from LOCAL machine SID, that correspond to the LOCAL user accounts. If you change the LOCAL machine SID, then the existing ACLs must be changed as well, meaning that you need to scan all files and registry entries in order to change them and to replace the "old" SID with the "New SID", just like NewSid from sysinternal did. GhostWalker does the same.Sysprep /reseal removes all the ACLs so that you do not have any issue with existing ACLs but then you loose all the access rights that you have previously set on your files/folders and registry.So how does Citrix Provisionning Server deals with MACHINE SID ? Thanks in advance

Guest wrote Re: Ardence is not the only OS streaming solution

on Wed, Jun 25 2008 12:20 PM

Add to that (other streaming OS solutions) emBoot's netBoot/i and winBoot/i...

Guest wrote VMWare not cooperating with security community?

on Wed, Aug 20 2008 12:45 PM

I've been told by one of my customers that VMWare is not coopertaing with the security community (whoever that is). I'm 99% sure this is second hand information, but regardless it concerns them greatly. I know it is related to hypervisor security (like blue pill). Anyone else hearing this?

Guest wrote broken link?

on Fri, Aug 22 2008 10:14 PM

Error : Could not find file 'C:\Inetpub\BrianMaddenWebic\upload\download\downloadfile\Brian%20Madden%20Live%20-%20Kevin%20Goodman.mp3'.

Guest wrote This is great...

on Tue, Aug 26 2008 8:30 AM

Awsome interview.

Guest wrote Great Content...

on Tue, Aug 26 2008 8:58 PM

ThinApp rocks!

Syndication

Recent Posts

Comments