![]() You have to buy Windows, pay Citrix, pay for seats (or TCALS, slightly less expensive per seats licenses if you arent running XP now) and ICA licenses which are still connection based. In the end, anyone deploying thin-clients uses Citrix so Microsoft succeeded in essentially foisting a huge tax on the thin-client market thwarting any inroads in might have had as a major desktop replacement. The killer is that microsoft then demanded a per seat license of NT 4.0 Professional for each user, whether they were running Citrix or not. Citrix then built Metaframe as an add-on to the multi-win kernel extensions and brought their superior management tools and protocols to the platform. RDP clients were only available for windows as per the citrix agreement. The multiwin technology was then baked into Windows NT 4.0 Terminal Server (and if you actually have a copy around and view the details on the core kernel DLLs, they still say citrix BTW) and they took their netmeeting protocol h.323 and created RDP. they didn't blink, instead they went into overdrive negotiation mode and eventually hammered out an agreement where they licensed multi-win to Microsoft for a small amount of cash, kept ICA to themselves and got Microsoft to sign a 3 year no compete for non-windows platforms. So the 8,000 lb gorilla at the last moment, Citrix 2.0 was DONE for months, refused to agree to the licensing terms for NT4.0 effectively derailing Citrix. the whole thing was created to steal multi-win and ICA before the thin-client rage destroyed them(as was the thinking back then) In reality it was a small team of program managers gathering requirements. Microsoft made a big splash with their "Hydra" project that they were going to come out with their own citrix killer. Citrix had secured the source code to Windows NT 4.0, ported multiwin and their ICA hooks to it, christened it Winframe 2.0 and had it ready to go when Microsoft pulled the plug. Then the thin-client rage hit, spurred largely by the success of Citrix. So you only paid for the max number of concurrent users. ![]() You paid for the server, then a per concurrent user license fee. but it was rock solid, super fast and worked. You purchased "Winframe" from them, it was their build and you had to get service packs etc. They mated multi-win to their ICA protocol for presentation. Citrix licensed the entire Windows 3.51 code base and overhauled the kernel with new multi-user windows feature, thereafter called multi-win. Then Windows came out and destroyed OS/2. a company named citrix came along an created a multi-user version with a remote protocol much faster and leaner than X. Here's the real scoop (BTW, I was a WinFrame 2.0 beta tester) Citrix still uses their superfast and lean ICA protocol. Wrong!! Citrix Metaframe does not run on RDP. Apple Remote Desktop does automatic resolution scaling, full screen, etc., and as of 2.1, even supports multiple monitors - even when using free VNC clients to connect! The VNC server piece (the one Apple calls "Client") is free, but there's a catch: at least one copy Remote Desktop Admin is required to be "legal", but then Remote Desktop Client can be installed on an unlimited number of machines in your organization. With one checkbox, any VNC client can connect to any machine running Apple's VNC server software (which it confusingly calls "Remote Desktop Client"), and Apple's client software (which it calls "Remote Desktop Admin") can connect to ordinary VNC servers on any platform. ![]() But as of version 2, the remote screen protocol is based on VNC. Apple Remote Desktop is much more than just a remote control solution it provides desktop and systems management tools, software distribution tools, mass screen sharing, scripted actions, and all sorts of other features. Īt the commercial end of the spectrum is Apple Remote Desktop 2.1. The best free client for Mac OS X, in my opinion, is Chicken of the VNC. (There's even an OS9vnc, on the same page.) On the server end of things, there's OSXvnc, a nice free VNC server for Mac OS X. For Mac OS X, there are several options what I believe to be the best options are below.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |