I haven't even visited the site in years, literally. Do people still use that?
I use Yahoo for two things; News (via Google and Fark) and currency conversion. That's it.
I remember when it was just a table of contents for the Internet. You used to be able to find whatever you wanted just by wandering through the directory. Those were the days...
I've actually considered embedding Ads in the main StationRipper window... but don't' know if that would be overly annoying.
Well, here's one data point for you. I won't install any application that does this unless I know I can turn them off either with an option, a hack or by buying the product if I know it's worth it even before I install it.
Eudora is the only product that does this that I use. I bought Opera for my N-Gage, but I've *never* installed the ad-sponsored version on any PC. Basically ad-sponsored==spyware.
Anyway, if yours is an open-source project -- someone will just compile an ad-free version.
I know that companies believe that they're protecting their revenue by making cheap crippled products, but ultimately how can this be a better approach than making the best product you can make at the best price you can make it?
No, managers are typically very nervous about IT people because of the power they wield over the computer systems. But they don't understand what it is that IT do and they don't see the value. These two factors make many IT positions insecure.
Staff live in fear of the power of the IT people. Anything you do that reminds them of this will be taken badly. Even the most light-hearted of practical jokes will get your arse handed to you.
The morality of the issue is that it's both totally moral and totally legal to purchase secondhand items. It's no more immoral to buy a secondhand game than it is immoral to not pay some amount to the producers of that game for every second you spend playing the game privately at home, or to go to the toilet during TV ad breaks for that matter.
It's not my fault if someone's dodgy business model doesn't work within the law and socially accepted behaviour.
In any case, there's no difference to the producer if you purchased a used game or stole/pirated it outright.
That's not true. If I buy a used game from a friend, two things happen. That friend no longer has the game and will have to purchase another if they wish to play it again. Also, that friend then has some of my money that they can use to buy something else, say another game -- possibly by the same producer.
The secondary market is not an island, detached from the primary market. Each affects the other.
Nintendo, Sony or Microsoft could always include in the license for all games, a clause that you may not resell the product. That would probably stamp out most of the trade, although there's no way in hell it would stop direct sales.
That's illegal, they can't restrict that. Moreover, if they include something illegal in their licence, it invalidates the whole thing (effectively dropping their rights back to just the standard ones a copyright owner has). This arguably makes it illegal to play the game because that requires that a "copy" be made in the machine's RAM. Though I maintain that a running copy is not a true copy. I am not a lawyer.
You can run it for as long as you want, you just have to turn to 3rd-parties for security solutions. Current details say that "Critical security updates will be provided on the Windows Update site through June 30, 2006.", so if a few years are added to that you may still be downloading security patches for 98 from windowsupdate.microsoft.com in 2010.
Normally I wouldn't care, but as it happens there's a PC on the desk next to me that's running 98SE. After being stored away for almost a year it's been turned into an extra screen for my main PC. We've got a couple of presentation laptops (98 and ME) that are almost too low spec for that role that I'm probably going to turn into thin clients. So 98 might still be in daily use at work for a few years yet.
Dell's critical functions are marketing and logistics. Their marketing gurus and logistics engineers are very much their own. Dell is not a "technology" company per se.
If their marketing gurus are good enough to be worthy of comment, why to I always have to deal with someone clueless whenever I want to order a Dell PC?
PeopleSoft® Enterprise is a family of best-in-class applications based on our Pure Internet Architecture® designed for flexible configuration and open, multi-vendor integration. It is ideally suited for financial, government, education, healthcare and other services industries. It is also ideally suited for large, company-wide functions such as human resources, finance, IT, procurement, marketing, services and sales across all industries.
So, what is it again?
Snide remarks about marketing speak aside, If you're having so many computer failures maybe the problem is your IT staff. There are (Windows) computers where I work that haven't had any problems since I installed them, which in some cases is up to two years ago. Moving to thin clients because your IT department doesn't know how to support normal PCs isn't the right reason to move to thin clients.
I was working backwards from the current one. I posted to/. as I reached the drunk bitch sketch. I know a few earlier than that was a very funny one titled "How to win friends and influence Bats" (or similar, that's from memory), which doesn't include anything sucking. I was, however, suprised at how may of the comics do have a high degree of "X sucks", whether it's the underlying theme or the punchline.
It's still my favourite comic on the planet though.
I'll try to stay on topic, but your original question is so specific that I think you've probably asked the question in the wrong place. I'll address your checklist to try and keep me on the rails
Is the application a fat-client or a thin-client (web-based) client?
Your first question looks wrong off the bat. If you have a web-based client, why are you needing Citrix at all? If the software is already server-based with a web interface, it doesn't need a terminal. Unless that's your point, you don't explain what you would do with the checklist answers.
What is the frequency of queries to the application server?
How much data is transferred between the client and the server?
Unless Citrix has some quirks I'm unaware of, the first question is immaterial. The second question is much more important. Applications that are network bound are much better to run with a terminal, ie; I always verify our main database's schema using a copy of the client running on the server. However, the last two major upgrades we done have been specifically designed to reduce the network traffic that it generates, while at the same time we're starting to sniff around gigabit ethernet. Since most applications are not run on Citrix-esq installations, any new version is suddenly likely to change the balance of network traffic to server and client load.
Will the application users connect to the application server over a WAN connection?
Are there any concerns about WAN connection usage and time required to retrieve data - over a WAN connection?
Here I'm assuming you're talking about non-network apps (Like Word) and a user's connection to the Citrix server. Obviously, high latency to the Citrix server will make any app that would otherwise be installed locally look crappy over Citrix. That's so obvious that I think I might have missed your point on this one.
Will files be transferred to-and-from the application server?
Here I have to again assume you mean that staff might be rocking up with a floppy or CD with files that need to be transferred up to the application on the server so they can work on them. Yes, I would imagine that applications with large amounts of local data are best handled locally.
Can the application in question be used off-line?
Do you mean "Does the program need a server anyway"? Ultimately that only matters for laptops and server downtime. I question the value of laptops in lots of situations. Where I work, apart from a couple of people that develop stuff at home those of us that use laptops only ever use them plugged into a LAN. They're just a familiar environment that can be moved from one office to another, and occasionally used to check email remotely (except we have webmail now, so any PC will do). As for server downtime, many companies have a key network database application that staff use all the time. Without it they're stuff anyway, what does it matter if a few other lightweight apps are down too.
How many users will be connecting the application?
You're referring to CPU load on the server? This is where I tend to think that Citrix is the wrong solution. Desktop PCs are so cheap and powerful, why are we killing ourselves to build a monster terminal server? But you don't want to talk about that. Or maybe you mean that if the numbers are too low, it's not worth centralising? I guess the sweet spot depends on the price of the application (if it's licenced differently for Citrix vs desktops) vs its processing requirements.
What is the geographic location of the users?
That looks like your WAN question above.
Citrix can provide centralized management/administration. Is this preferable?
Not sure how this would differ application-to-application. This would much likely differ from department to department.
Okay, I've tried to stick to your rules, now here's my real answer. Centralised Citrix-like systems for Windows applications are not the answer. Thin
This sounds like the hugely obscure Amstrad Mega PC. It was a 386 SX 25 MHz with a whole 1MB of RAM and a Sega MegaDrive all in the one box. The main problem was that the PC started life underpowered and was hard to upgrade, so half of it became out of date particularly fast. Destined to become a collectors' item.
Slashdot Mirror
I remember when it was just a table of contents for the Internet. You used to be able to find whatever you wanted just by wandering through the directory. Those were the days...
Eudora is the only product that does this that I use. I bought Opera for my N-Gage, but I've *never* installed the ad-sponsored version on any PC. Basically ad-sponsored==spyware.
Anyway, if yours is an open-source project -- someone will just compile an ad-free version.
Have you tried charging for support?
I know that companies believe that they're protecting their revenue by making cheap crippled products, but ultimately how can this be a better approach than making the best product you can make at the best price you can make it?
No, managers are typically very nervous about IT people because of the power they wield over the computer systems. But they don't understand what it is that IT do and they don't see the value. These two factors make many IT positions insecure.
Staff live in fear of the power of the IT people. Anything you do that reminds them of this will be taken badly. Even the most light-hearted of practical jokes will get your arse handed to you.
It's not my fault if someone's dodgy business model doesn't work within the law and socially accepted behaviour.
The secondary market is not an island, detached from the primary market. Each affects the other.
Can you use both slots at the same time? If so, there's some seriously powerful multihead options for that board.
Normally I wouldn't care, but as it happens there's a PC on the desk next to me that's running 98SE. After being stored away for almost a year it's been turned into an extra screen for my main PC. We've got a couple of presentation laptops (98 and ME) that are almost too low spec for that role that I'm probably going to turn into thin clients. So 98 might still be in daily use at work for a few years yet.
I thought sales was a division of marketing...
That's what I was going to say. The second NIC on my nForce2 motherboard is a 3com.
I think someone needs to learn to do their form validation on the server, not via Javascript.
Snide remarks about marketing speak aside, If you're having so many computer failures maybe the problem is your IT staff. There are (Windows) computers where I work that haven't had any problems since I installed them, which in some cases is up to two years ago. Moving to thin clients because your IT department doesn't know how to support normal PCs isn't the right reason to move to thin clients.
It's still my favourite comic on the planet though.
Your first question looks wrong off the bat. If you have a web-based client, why are you needing Citrix at all? If the software is already server-based with a web interface, it doesn't need a terminal. Unless that's your point, you don't explain what you would do with the checklist answers.
Unless Citrix has some quirks I'm unaware of, the first question is immaterial. The second question is much more important. Applications that are network bound are much better to run with a terminal, ie; I always verify our main database's schema using a copy of the client running on the server. However, the last two major upgrades we done have been specifically designed to reduce the network traffic that it generates, while at the same time we're starting to sniff around gigabit ethernet. Since most applications are not run on Citrix-esq installations, any new version is suddenly likely to change the balance of network traffic to server and client load.
Here I'm assuming you're talking about non-network apps (Like Word) and a user's connection to the Citrix server. Obviously, high latency to the Citrix server will make any app that would otherwise be installed locally look crappy over Citrix. That's so obvious that I think I might have missed your point on this one.
Here I have to again assume you mean that staff might be rocking up with a floppy or CD with files that need to be transferred up to the application on the server so they can work on them. Yes, I would imagine that applications with large amounts of local data are best handled locally.
Do you mean "Does the program need a server anyway"? Ultimately that only matters for laptops and server downtime. I question the value of laptops in lots of situations. Where I work, apart from a couple of people that develop stuff at home those of us that use laptops only ever use them plugged into a LAN. They're just a familiar environment that can be moved from one office to another, and occasionally used to check email remotely (except we have webmail now, so any PC will do). As for server downtime, many companies have a key network database application that staff use all the time. Without it they're stuff anyway, what does it matter if a few other lightweight apps are down too.
You're referring to CPU load on the server? This is where I tend to think that Citrix is the wrong solution. Desktop PCs are so cheap and powerful, why are we killing ourselves to build a monster terminal server? But you don't want to talk about that. Or maybe you mean that if the numbers are too low, it's not worth centralising? I guess the sweet spot depends on the price of the application (if it's licenced differently for Citrix vs desktops) vs its processing requirements.
That looks like your WAN question above.
Not sure how this would differ application-to-application. This would much likely differ from department to department.
Okay, I've tried to stick to your rules, now here's my real answer. Centralised Citrix-like systems for Windows applications are not the answer. Thin
The Tycho You Didn't Know: Singles (Is it a Sims expansion?)
The Double-You Bee: Recent WB releases and/or the review system.
Read it again.
I was going to list a batch of recent comics that didn't fit into your description, but I haven't found one yet...
This sounds like the hugely obscure Amstrad Mega PC. It was a 386 SX 25 MHz with a whole 1MB of RAM and a Sega MegaDrive all in the one box. The main problem was that the PC started life underpowered and was hard to upgrade, so half of it became out of date particularly fast. Destined to become a collectors' item.