Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

To Citrix or Not to Citrix?

Posted by Cliff on from the such-is-the-question dept.

Saqib Ali asks: "These days, it seems almost any application can be served on a Citrix Farm . However, not all application are best fit for a Citrix environment, and I am sure most IT admins are faced with the tough decision of whether to host an application on Citrix or not. What questions should an IT administrator ask before deciding whether to serve an application over Citrix or just plainly install the application on each desktop? I am NOT looking for the benefits of using Citrix, as I'm very well aware of them. What I want to know is, what criteria should be used in determining whether to use Citrix for an application or not. I just don't want to use technology for the sake of using technology. There should be a methodical way (like a checklist or questionnaire) for determining the feasibility (NOT PROs and CONs) of serving an (any) application on Citrix. Here is a Checklist/Questionnaire that I have come up with. Any more suggestions to add to the checklist?"

3 of 31 comments (clear)

  1. Complexity of user interface by Marxist+Hacker+42 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Nobody's mentioned it yet, but I've yet to see ANY terminal server handle extremely complex user interfaces across a network very well. By complex, I mean: varying colors, extremely busy screens, and at the worst point, 3d graphics rendered in real time. In other words, the kind of bitmaps that don't compress really well put a strain on Citrix, VNC, or Windows Terminal Service all alike.

    --
    SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
  2. Re:Mod parent down by MemoryAid · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Sometimes people really need to hear what they don't want to -- for their own good, of course.

    --
    Language students: Don't try to learn English here. This ain't it.
  3. Avoid it, unless you have to. by k4rm4_p0l7c3 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I have supported MetaFrame, sold Citrix.. their product enables great things to happen over WANs, but corporations tend to abuse it from what I've seen.

    And by abuse I mean shaving off having to do multiple installations in a corporation by having a central corporate MetaFrame farm. then the SQL server disk array fails. then the whole corp is disabled. Hello eggs, meet basket.

    Also, be prepared to deal with the horrid hell that is Citrix printer support. It's not entirely their fault as some printer drivers want to do things in userspace vs kernel mode, but the support wasn't that good when I actually ran MetaFrame. It is better from what I hear now, but I'm only seeing it on the client end, and my corporate support SUCKS! And oh my god, there's nothign more frustrating than a Citrix session that's hung because of a stick print job or some print related mishap.

    To print reliably, every citrix user will need a networked laserjet as their default printer. if they run windows..

    so. good product, can save you in a pinch for a deployment and can do amazing things over heavy loaded WANs. But oh my GOD please test it in a lab before you deploy it. don't crush your people in the trenches. thanks