Skip to main content

MS Response to Why Not Promote VFP and Citrix

David Dee (see post from 9/22) asked MS about promoting VFP by discussing items with Citrix...As noted in his comments, the response from MS was:
 
We do not test VFP with Citrix and it is not something we are focused on as a solution, mainly due to lack of demand. For web (or thin client) applications with VFP, we are promoting VFP with ASP.NET using VFP 8.0 with Visual Studio .NET 2003 and that is working well, and most companies we talk to who need web front ends to VFP applications are using or considering ASP.NET with VFP combined. Thanks for your feedback.
 

Huh?!?! - Until such time as Desktop apps are killed off completely (don't see that happening anytime soon), I actually prefer to recommend Citrix or Terminal Server based solutions than purely Web-based.

Maybe David's problem was actually using the term "Citrix" instead of the more "MS-friendly" Terminal Server. VFP continually gets updated in service releases to better support Terminal Server applications(recall the NOBITMAP setting in SP3 for VFP 6). In fact, in one newsgroup, one of the fastest suggested ways to build a "mobile" app for the PocketPC was NOT to use SQL Server for PocketPC, etc but rather to build a Terminal Server (read: CITRIX-like) application and connect to it using the PocketPC's Terminal Server client. The only caution was "keep your screens really small".

It's the "MS response" that really hurts the community. Promoting VFP with ASP.Net is great for all those bleeding edge developers (and yes, I know it hurts to say it but for most people ASP.Net is still a little too bleeding edge for many companies  - note that not even MS bCentral allows SOAP access on their .Net services - wonder why not?).

The fact is that EVERY developer needs to be told of workable solutions. Citrix and Terminal Servers represent GREAT Solutions for companies who have remote needs and WORKING desktop applications. VFP is not only ideally suited in these environments - it kicks serious butt when it comes to  performance! Why? Because the application actually runs LOCALLY instead of being on a network.

Other reasons to consider Citrix/Terminal Server solutions:
1. It's easier to support - you can shadow other users, and easily disconnect users when connected.
2. Single point of access - easier to track errors, provide updates and more.
3. Single type of workstation - easier to manage. Hell, even better than trying to deal with multiple browsers
4. You can FIND many companies willing to HOST TS servers for you - yes, they may charge for it but will provide 24/7/365 uptime with various guarantees (check out http://www.meganetserve.com)

If you have never considered using Terminal Server as a remote solution for your apps, I strongly recommend it. AND it's getting easier and better. Don't be fooled by Microsoft's response - VFP does work well under Citrix and is always being improved to work better because of it. (just don't mention Citrix in the same breath <bg>)

Andrew MacNeill

 

 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Merry Christmas

Whether you celebrate now, have already celebrated your past holiday, are planning to, or not, I hope you find yourself surrounded by family and those you love during this holiday season and are able to remember fondly those who are not with you. We often find ourselves buried in work, or too distracted by other problems, to share and remember a few moments with those closest to us. So many of us are separated by huge distances, we often find it easier to focus on those who are out of arm's reach yet so easy to connect with online, instead of those who are right beside us. So do yourself a favour, put down the keyboard (stylus, mouse, etc) and spend that time. I know I will. Merry Christmas. Powered by ScribeFire .
4 comments
Read more

Programmers vs. Developers vs. Architects

I received an email this morning from Brandon Savage 's newsletter. Brandon's a PHP guru (works at Mozilla) but his newsletter and books have some great overall perspectives for developers of all languages. However, this last one (What's the difference between developers and architects?) kind of rubs me the wrong way. Either that, or I've just missed the natural inflation of job descriptions. (maybe, it's like the change in terminology between Garbage man and Waste Engineer or Secretary and Office Administrator) So maybe it's just me - but I think there's still a big difference between Programmer, Developer and then of course, architect. The key thing here is that every role has a different perspective and every one of those perspectives has value. The original MSF create roles like Product Manager, Program Manager, Developer, Tester, etc - so every concept may pigeon hole people into different roles. But the statements Brandon makes are often distinction...
11 comments
Read more

From Writing to AI: the pattern repeats itself

When I was ten years old, my dad bought a computer and, thanks to an advertising supplement in a Superman comic I read, it was a TRS-80. A month later, he dragged the entire family (my mom and brother were not the most enthusiastic) to a class at Radio Shack teaching how to use microcomputers. At the time, I understood why my mom wasn’t that excited: the computer was yet another gadget in the house. But today I find it fascinating. My mother went to Vassar in the 50s. She learned how to type — not a common skill at the time — but it opened doors. Her ability to communicate effectively led her to a career in adult education and later communications work with the CBC (Canadian Broadcasting Corporation). This isn’t a nostalgia post. Today, the ability to use artificial intelligence, be it through Copilot or simply writing the right prompt, is becoming a critical skill. But is it really that novel? In the 1500s and 1600s, the printing press gradually made reading accessible beyond cler...
Post a Comment
Read more