It's laughable ...
I was just reading about Bill Gates' testimony before the Senate. Microsoft undoubtedly is in a monopoly position and those senators don't even know how to ask the question. Someone will eventually figure it out.
Either way, I thought I'd pass on some info on CTXS:
The following are features in Picasso that Microsoft will *not* provide and CTXS basically has a 2/5 year non-compete agreement on these issues:
Feature Comment
_______ _____________
1) Shadowing(the ability to look at another user's screen)
a realistic necessity for
support.
2) Load Balancing Must have for significant
number of users or critical
application. FedX can't
or would be crazy not to
buy considering number of
users. Effectively gives
redundancy, fault tolerance and
performance.
3) ALE Nice but not critical.
4) Direct Asynch Cool but not absolute need
5) Multi-protocol support Critical
6) Single source clients(DOS, Unix, Mac) Many companies will need
because they have Unix clients.
7) Secure ICA Probable needed. FBI&CIA won't
think twice. Big installs will
probably need because some
secret info is bound to be
accessed.
8) Remote drive mapping. Good to have.
9) Remote printer mapping Must-Must have. I've worked
on projects that would have
been canned if remote printing
was not available.
10) Remote device support Neat but not needed.
11) Audio Support In some cases needed.(I'm
not kidding, I've seen it)
12) Seamless Windows I'm not even sure what it is.
13) Ability to realistically Use Dial-up or Internet
Must-must have.
I know some claim that Microsoft can just fix RDP. While I see it
definately a technical possibility, I see major problems with fixing
TShare. It's a video protocol (i.e. frames per second) and is not
based on the same kind of video that we use for application programs.
Technically, I believe that Microsoft will have to scrap RDP and
build a ICA-type protocol from ground-up. ICA was built with the
original intent of what it does today. TShare was not. Microsoft's
business people will figure it out after a release or two. I'm sure
that Microsoft's programmers think that they can fix it with enough
programming energy(remember OLE).
As such, I think it will be a while before the Lion eats the Lamb.
Someone mentioned that Microsoft is not in the business of keeping
CTXS in business. I don't think they are in the business of putting
them out. As the MSFT/CTXS agreement works, Microsoft has one
partner - CTXS. Everyone else is excluded legally, technically and
physically. CTXS is in the cat-birds seat. MSFT and CTXS have a
monopoly together(o.k. go ahead and get scared that MSFT won't want
to share monopoly position with anybody).
As someone asked, if FedX does do Windows Thin-Client versus Java NetPC (you know Windows-Thin is going to win for monopolistic and
practical reasons) CTXS's Picasso is a given.
I've spoken with sources close to the situation and FedX is working
closer to a decision. So, it is not a question of whether CTXS will
be part of the deal(they are, period) but when FedX will make a
decision.
In closing, it appears that the supply of weak hands is dwindling and
CTXS stock is ready to turn. Time for shorts to cover(seriously).
-N |
