Re: Citrix vs. Terminal Server Performance?
From: Allen M (allenmiyake_at_majaro.com)
Date: 01/22/05
- Next message: Henry Craven: "Re: 2 network adapters setup thoughts"
- Previous message: Cris Hanna [SBS-MVP]: "Re: problem logging win98 clients to sbs2k3 domain"
- In reply to: Thomas F. Miller: "Citrix vs. Terminal Server Performance?"
- Next in thread: Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]: "Re: Citrix vs. Terminal Server Performance?"
- Reply: Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]: "Re: Citrix vs. Terminal Server Performance?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2005 16:10:17 -0800
I use Citrix Presentation Server 3.0 for SBS 2003. Works like a champ and
performance wise the speed is exceptional dependant upon the users internet
speed. Most of my clients are on DSL but I do have one client on a 384k dial
up that still gets decent performance. The advantage to Citrix over terminal
server is that we can publish applications. The advantage of published
applications is that we do not have to make a desktop connection and then
run the application inside of a virtual connection. One connection only. We
can also access all of these programs from any internet connection by
configuring Citrix's Web Interface.
"Thomas F. Miller" <thenet411@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:V5fId.13467$wZ2.4722@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
>I would like to hear from anyone that has had experience with both Citrix
>and Windows Terminal Server. I am primarily interested in performance
>comparison.
>
> Thanks!
>
>
- Next message: Henry Craven: "Re: 2 network adapters setup thoughts"
- Previous message: Cris Hanna [SBS-MVP]: "Re: problem logging win98 clients to sbs2k3 domain"
- In reply to: Thomas F. Miller: "Citrix vs. Terminal Server Performance?"
- Next in thread: Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]: "Re: Citrix vs. Terminal Server Performance?"
- Reply: Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]: "Re: Citrix vs. Terminal Server Performance?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|