Slashdot Mirror

Well, it's a big thing here (in Holland). You host your stuff /in the cloud/ or /on premises/. Even American consultants of cloud companies talk about /on premise/ here.

On the same subject:

http://www.brianmadden.com/blo...

And,yes, on-site would be a better expression, but it doesn't sound quite as puffed up. I also hear 'on prem'. Well, short is better than wrong I guess.

Microsoft already allows Win32 in store apps -- you do have to rebuild, but create a UWP app and bring in the Desktop Extensions SDK and that give you Win32.

That's only a very small subset of Win32. Project Centenial http://www.brianmadden.com/blo... is in the works though to allow full Win32 apps to run in the WinRT sandbox.

As to battery life, if you can play games on your phone you can run a Win32 App without worry.

A little known add on for Windows clients: RemoteApp for Hyper-V. It allows Windows clients (XP+) to be used as seamless application hosts for RDP clients.

http://www.brianmadden.com/blogs/gabeknuth/archive/2010/01/06/RemoteApp-for-Hyper_2D00_V-_2D00_-Microsoft_2700_s-single_2D00_user-app-solution.aspx

Caveat: does not require Hyper-V

FOSS to the rescue, you know it had to happen http://www.brianmadden.com/blogs/gabeknuth/archive/2012/09/21/relief-classicshell-gives-windows-8-a-start-menu-and-boots-directly-to-desktop.aspx. I couldn't use Windows 7 without Classic Shell http://classicshell.sourceforge.net/. M$ has always produced buggy crap that has to be fixed with other software more often than not FOSS.

THere's a book on it
http://www.brianmadden.com/blogs/brianmadden/archive/2012/03/22/our-new-book-quot-the-vdi-delusion-quot-is-now-available-for-download.aspx

Only applicable to data center and enterprise editions, not standard or web editions. The 4GB includes memory for applications and drivers so you either can have 2GB for apps + 2GB for kernel or 3GB/1GB using the /4GT switch. But it is a trade off if you have more than 1GB for the kernal. This dilemma is especially evident if you're using Terminal Services which will have performance issues if kernel space is less than 2GB. http://www.brianmadden.com/blogs/brianmadden/archive/2004/02/19/the-4gb-windows-memory-limit-what-does-it-really-mean.aspx

Incorrect. Windows Server 2003 32-bit goes up to 64 GB. http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/aa366778(v=vs.85).aspx

The reason XP/Vista/7 32-bit is limited to 4GB is because there are so many badly-written drivers that assume they will be in a physical 4GB address space, that there was no way for Windows to change it without massive bluescreens from old drivers.

To use up to 64 GB, apps and drivers have to be written to access all memory through a 2GB sliding Physical Address Extension window.

Saw Brian Madden's video's recently with the results of their testing/comparison of ICA, RDP, SPICE see: http://media.brianmadden.com/qumranetvids/blogplayerstatic.asp It was very clear that SPICE far outperformed either ICA or RDP.

4GB is the amount of addressable memory, but that number doesn't take into account the way Windows handles that memory. Because of the way its memory management scheme works, 32-bit Windows can only address a total of 2GB of kernel memory and 2GB of memory for a single application. With 4GB of memory, a single application could not access 3GB. Additionally, the limitation of 2GB of kernel memory poses problems for terminal servers and other applications that may use more than 2GB of kernel memory. See The 4GB Windows Memory Limit: What does it really mean? for more information.

My point in recommending the consideration of 64-bit Windows for amounts of memory over 2GB is that you may start to run into these limitations in 32-bit Windows with over 2GB of memory. If you actually have a reason for putting more than 2GB of memory in your computer, these limitations, and a 64-bit operating system, are things worth considering depending on your application.

Many of the features found in the base Presentation Server package are coming to Longhorn Server. For a quick overview of the changes to Terminal Services under Longhorn see Brian Madden's page. It's generally geared towards Citrix but there is more general TS knowledge there than just about any other place on the web not least of which is Brian himself.

Brian Madden (brianmadden.com) is an excellent source for info on Citrix and Virtualization. Yesterday, he published a video with Brian Oglesby whose done a lot with ESX and virtualization techniques that you're looking at doing.

Watch the video here (http://www.brianmadden.com/content/content.asp?id =620). He shows a lot of the benchmarks and gives a great sense of how to use what resources you've got, or if you're building from scratch. Basically, Windows XP Pro VMs on ESX server do NOT scale well in comparison to Terminal Server sessions or Citrix sessions. I'd go into further detail, but the video explains it all.

The are several alternatives that provide 80% of Citrix functionality at 30% the cost. It will up to you to verify that the 80% will include everything you need. Interesting options include Ericom Software, Jetro and others. There are also some online resources for this type of information such as Brian Madden, and DABCC.

I think I heard something at one time about the next version of TS having some time of App level publishing built it, but I can't truly recall.

It's a really popular rumour actually, one that probably has some truth to it..

Essentially the rumour is that Microsoft pushed the working demo of published apps (Or Bear Paw) from Windows 2003 R2 to Longhorn Server (essentially 2007) because Citrix agreed that they wouldn't make Metaframe for Linux.

In windows, if you want users to be able to log in to mutliple desktops\terminals with local profiles and receive default registry settings for an application, you must manage the default user registry key on the target desktops (which a new user would use as a template to generate a new profile when logging on with a local profile on that particular machine for the first time). Alternately, you can use the Flex Profile Kit from Login Consultants (free as in no dough) found here: http://www.brianmadden.com/content/content.asp?ID= 315. With this, you use mandatory profiles as the default profile and then use a modified version of the ork2k3 tool proflwiz.exe to copy the registry keys you wish to save to an OPS file in the user's home folder. Hence, the registry settings the user needs are saved and persist across machines. Alternately, you can design a Group Policy ADM file to push down the registry changes you require for your default application files. The flex profile solution is far better, in my opinion.

Your wish has been granted!

Really, ASP sites are too easy to hax0r...

I'm a Citrix Professional too, but you must admit the ability to publish applications and load balancing on MF is a feature easily "approachable" ;-D, by TS (but see this article from Brian Madden's site).

I am looking for a real OSI alternative to Citrix or TS on the Server Side (TightVNC nor X with compression are real alternatives, primarily for the (very poor) performance :-( )

Saludos