• Introducing Dark Mode! Switch by clicking on the lightbulb icon next to Search or by clicking on Default style at the bottom left of the page!

RE: citrix and windows 2000 terminal services on clients --- do w

MSiebenschuh

Well Known Member
RE: citrix and windows 2000 terminal services on clients --- do w

Ok this will be my last response to this board but I feel we need to show
all points after this I will concede ;-).

First point - I DID SAY THERE WOULD BE A PERFORMANCE HIT - I just made it
clear that they would all be working. I don't take down 26 servers in a day!
I was just saying if I needed to I could ask my users to log off and in 10
minutes I would have an entire company back to working just like the day
before. (If I want to bring them all down in a day without any real impact I
just take a server out of the published app. Tell the users to log out and
back in. Now the box is free for me to mod. When I'm done load balancing
takes care of the rest.) Your fat client's wouldn't have a backup of the
directory (unless you are pushing out your packages in a special way) so
they would have to hack around checking stuff out (we don't allow our users
to do that and I really don't feel like going to a hundred machines and
doing it for them).

Second point - I wasn't really trying to get into detailed money calcs. If
we wanted to get nit picky we could find really cheap TSE's and even cheaper
PC's I was being generic. We actually use winterms so there is no hardware
issue. If a user has a problem with it they just get a whole new winterm.
You might spend a few hours trying to figure out if it is an OS issue, a OW
issue, a bad HDD issue, a bad HDD controller issue, etc. In the end the
initial outlay for TSE is probably more but the maintainability and lower
maintenance give at least a break even with less effort.

Third point - actually I check out stuff to TSE when absolutely needed (no
this is not supported by JDE we even had to mod the OL app to do this -
please don't go off on this fact since we all do what we need to in order to
make OW work for us)with all my users logged on and it works fine. But you
do make a good point about not affecting all users with a code change. In
the case of just 2 TSE's you would definitely be correct - in our case I
have my financial users on certain boxes and our distribution users on other
boxes to prevent this very problem you say confronts the TSE's configs. In
your example it sounds like at the end of a few months none of your fat
clients have the same code base with all the checkouts to fix things.

Fourth point - I guess the rest of us losers need to hire you to show us
how to maintain a stable working system with a minimum of impact since we
can't manage a "code base" - but wait that would make you a consultant whom
you seem to vehemently hate for some reason.

My reply was made in an effort to give Melo an understanding of the benefits
of TSE in a large environment not to blast others on this list as lazy know
nothings (I have no idea why you are striking out like this). Some of these
smaller companies might have a CNC/DEV/BackOffice that consist of 2 people.
Just because they take an easy to maintain route at a little more expense
doesn't mean they are lazy they might be working harder than you or I. Again
I must reiterate the benefit of TSE as far as other business apps that are
used in addition to OW, the low maintenance, and the ability to restrict
users to what you need them to have (fat clients mean that users are
installing 20 copies of AIM, the latest and greatest screen saver and who
knows what other widget that goes out and blows a reg key. (Because they
have to be local admins to pick up packages so that means they can install
software). No my solution isn't optimal for all companies - which one is? I
think the key to this list is showing what you have and how well it works
for you and letting others draw their own conclusions. With that I sign off
to further replies about this. Until the next hot topic...

Mark Siebenschuh
Enterprise Software System Administrator
HP9000 (V-class/K-class/D-class)
Oracle 8.0.5
JDEB733 Base (in the middle of the XE upgrade)
26 Dell 6450's TSE/Citrix server farm
 

jgersic

Reputable Poster
Re: citrix and windows 2000 terminal services on clients --- do w

I wanted to make a comment on one that you made... It is true, for the
entire business I am the CNC/coder/report writer, and admin to the boxes
OneWorld runs on. I don't have either the time, nor the bandwidth of the
network, to download fat clients, let alone multiple downloads
simultaneously. I am running TSE even for local clients just due to this
fact. And with the onslaught of service packs and ESU's coming out from JDE,
it makes my life much easier with one, rather than thirty, machines to hit.
As for the hardware costs, licenses, etc, I think a case can be made
either way depending on the business and technical infrastructure of the
business...but the people issue is a good one. I think there are alot of
businesses out there who only have one or two people who are supposed to run
the entire enterprise, and anything that can make my life easier is very
welcome..

John

John Gersic
OneWorld Administrator
eGlobe, Inc.
703/787-5727 x.2033
jgersic@eglobe.com
 
Top