When to use Citrix 1

[bradje]

Hi,
Looked via the FAQ and couldn't see an answer, so here goes:
We have 99 NT servers (Yes 99, not 100) and a few Novell (3.12) servers running old and new apps. The apps connect to mainframe d/bases, Unix, SQL, etc. U name it, we got it, in terms of diversity of apps running. We have imaging and so on.
For Disaster Recovery purposes, I am being told by a project manager, that we need to implement Citrix as our DR solution for the NT servers.
Given the breadth and complexity of some of the apps (and their age (I can't even find original install disks for some of them!) is Citrix a feasible way to go, or should I be ghosting and doing regular backups, to get back up if a server goes down?
Thanks,
JB

 

[30362]

Keep in mind that Citrix is to be used as a thin-client, not a server replacement. All Citrix will allow you to do is offer a desktop to users at remote sites, via the Internet or internally.

It will not backup your existing servers at all, think of Citrix as a glorified PC-Anywhere solution for home and remote users.

 

[CitrixEngineer]

It's certainly a solution worth considering seriously - it's a little bit more than a "Glorified PC-Anywhere";

Like anything, it depends entirely on your current environment. Some apps work flawlessly over Citrix. If you have a large number of bespoke or 16-bit apps, then careful consideration will have to be given to them. In the case of the 16-bit apps, are there 32-bit alternatives? The very first thing to consider is can the users work be done with existing apps, or is there budget for more suitable replacements. If you've lost the install disks, then these apps are as good as history.

For intensive graphics apps and imaging, this is not a good environment; The core of Terminal Services, written by Citrix, separates the user display from the application's logic, so all the processing is done by the server(s). Similarly, databases are not good, unless you can split the client easily - as with Oracle. The gotcha here is that Oracle clients can be resource-intensive too. There are many things that can be done to get databases working, so this is an open option.

I would wholeheartedly recommend a trial with "proven" apps, such as MS Office, and test "unproven" apps individually. Yes, it's a long process, but with a migration such as you are planning, you're probably considering a step-by-step rollout anyway to keep tabs on everything. I think there's a list of compatible apps on Citrix's site.

Without doing a full feasibilty study of your entire operation, this is not really something that can easily be covered via a forum like this, but I recommend the Citrix route as a sound way to manage core business applications, and provide a consistent way of accessing work from all your users' locations. With so many users, I would consider the portal style of NFuse.

Every implementation I have been a part of has certainly brought major benefits to the clients concerned - they've told me so.

Hope this helps CitrixEngineer@yahoo.co.uk

 

[bradje]

Thanks for the considered input. Much appreciated.

The 16 bit apps are not available as 32bit, but I think it may be a matter of putting as many as we can on Citrix and leaving the rest as normal client-server, with alternative DR for those left-over boxes.

Can anyone suggest how long a standard app, like Word2000, would take to put on Citrix?
This DR business sure is expensive. At the same time the corporate push is to go XP!! I wish one thing at a time would happen in IT, but it never seems to be the case.
JB

 

[CitrixEngineer]

An application like Word 2000 only requires a single installation, even with 99 servers.

Let me qualify;

There are two equally good ways of getting servers built and apps rolled out in a hurry.

1. Ensure that every server is exactly the same, build one, install Office 2000/XP and Ghost it (we use Altiris, but the principle is the same).

2. Use Installation Manager ("free" with MetaFrame XPe) to build a single package which you can then schedule to deploy at any time. Obviously this will require a bit of testing and tweaking - especially if you want to get all the Service packs and ACS's into the build.

The advantage with IM is that if an application installation fails, it has a "recorder", which is a bit like Windiff, in that it takes a snapshot of your system before and after the application is installed. The system can be returned to the previous state by using the Rollback facility. IM has an appliation compatibility list on Citrix's site, but seems to work with many that are not on that list.

A more expensive option would be to use SMS and the Windows Installer service - but since IM can deploy MSI packages as well as its native ADF packages, there's no point if you've already bought MetaFrame.

30362 makes a very good point when he/she(!) says that thin client is not a replacement for all server-based apps. My wording, same meaning, I think. However, many UNIX applications can also be deployed via MetaFrame for UNIX, with the same potential restrictions to graphics-intensive apps - although I have managed to get a circuit-diagram CAD-type application working fairly well over Solaris.

Hope this helps CitrixEngineer@yahoo.co.uk

 

[CitrixEngineer]

Addendum;

To get an idea of how things will work over MetaFrame, try using the Terminal Services (RDP) client to connect to a Windows 2000 Server running Terminal Services.

You're limited in many ways - ie printing, application publishing, load balancing, clients, manageability and scalability, but you will be able to _fully_ test every application before making a serious investment into a technology that has a steep learning curve (if you don't know the basics of Terminal Services, policies and profiles).

See also my FAQs on Testing.

Hope this helps. CitrixEngineer@yahoo.co.uk