ballpark citrix solution cost for small office?

[terrahawk]

Hi,

I am looking for an estimated cost. We are a division of a larger corporation that would like remote access to a SQL database of ours. I understand that this is what Citrix is designed for. This would be for an estimated 10-15 people to access the SQL database from off site (Windows 2000 desktops/servers)

Is "Citrix" just the software? then I should have a seperate server as well? Is this something I can do for $5,000, $10,000???

Thanks,
Peter

 

[ahalecitrix]

Peter,

I'll answer your question, but also give you a few things to consider with the price.

You will need a server to run Citrix from: estimated cost $2500 (Dell 1650 Dual P4's 1GB of RAM).

Citrix MetaFrame XPs 10 user + 5 user connection packs estimated cost around $4350.

Consulting time to build the box I would estimate a good integrator who knows what they are doing and wants to perform a good thorough job should quote you about 16-24 hours to build the server and get your application running on it.

Since all of your desktops are Windows 2000 you will not need to purchase TS CAL's.

So all in all you are looking at around 10k I'd say for a single server.

You could accomplish the same thing, but it will be less pretty by simply using Windows 2000 Terminal Server. Citrix allows you to publish applications. With a published app your SQL app will look as if it is running locally on the user's PC. With plain jane Terminal Server the user's will have to connect to a full Windows 2000 desktop and then access the application from there.

Citrix will also allow you to load balance the servers. This feature is not available with Windows 2000 TS. With 10-15 users you won't need multiple servers, but if you plan to go you can add servers to the Citrix MetaFrame farm. The user load will then be spread across each of the servers. Also Citrix licensing is based on the server farm as a whole. So just for an example even though you only have 15 users you can install Citrix on 15 servers if you want. Citrix bases their licensing on a per connection basis. You can install it on as many servers as you like, the connections will simply limited to the number of connection licenses that you have.

Also the printer management is greatly improved with Citrix MetaFrame XP. Configuring printing in MetaFrame is much easier than with Windows 2000 terminal services.

I might have just given you more information than you wanted to hear. Let me know if you have any questions.

 

[terrahawk]

Thank you,

The terminal services solution was suggested but the network administrator at our corporate office said it was not a secure method and nixed that idea.

I also just found this link:

http://www.thinclientpricing.com/citrix-mfXPs.asp

with pricing.

This is what I will use for an estimate:

* Software is $5,000-6,000 (20 users, Citrix MetaFrame XPs for Windows with Feature Release 2)
* New server for Citrix $3,000-4,000
* Setup/Configuration 20 hours @ $95/hour (this is our rate for a company we use) $1,900

Total $10,000-$12,000

 

[ahalecitrix]

Peter,

That sounds about right. Terminal Services is not as secure, and if the servers are to be accessed across the public Internet and not a VPN or private network Citrix really is the best solution.

 

[JeffHicks]

terra,

If I may make a suggestion. If it is at all possible to add about 20% to your cost, I would recommend getting XPa and using two servers that are load balanced. There is no additional licensing costs to running Citrix on two servers rather than one, and the fault tolerence this solution provides is a big benefit at a small cost. Having more than one server also allows you to do upgrades to the system (and since you are running on a Microsoft OS and a Microsoft Database engine, you can figure on some periodic updates) without interrupting the availability of the system. Ultimately, you know the criticality of the system and the cost of it being up more than I do. I just wanted to give you a head's up on another configuration. Good luck.

Jeff

 

[terrahawk]

Thanks for that suggestion Jeff. I learned something. Maybe its not for this post, but is load balancing what people do with their file & print server as well? I'm getting a new SQL/data server next year so maybe I could put the one that will be replaced (Compaq Proliant 800 - 500 MHz PIII) to work with our current file/print server (Compaq Proliant PIII 1GHz)? Not sure how that works with W2K Server licnesing.

Re Citrix, I did email my quote to some executives. I don't think we will ever get the Citrix solution, but I needed an estimate. They will be developing a new CRM that they want us to be a part of (eliminating the need to them to access our CRM remotely).

 

[ahalecitrix]

Jeff is right about the value in using XPa and another server for load balancing.

The reason I mentioned the Terminal Server solution as a possible option is that I am a true lover of Citrix, but you really get the most benefits from it once you start using the load balancing capabilities.

Load balancing is an actual feature built into MetaFrame. MetaFrame is an add on install that enhances plain jane Windows Terminal Services. For Win2k file and print servers you would also need some sort of 3rd party load balancing product.

Windows 2000 Advanced server does have clustering built in, but this is really a redundancy / disaster recovery feature and not used to load balance servers.