Jason and Steve,
I have owned Citrix since before it fell, buying during the fall, and again recently. As I interpret their news release, Jason, it is not for "deals within corporate headquarters." Rather, the ICA protocol is given, I believe without charge, to OEMs for inclusion in the products mentioned to insure a compatible open standard. Then, Citrix makes its money from selling software for servers and licensing for individual users, currently boasting over a million seats for ICA.
The independent computing (ICA) protocol allows any information device to run Windows application by doing the work on the server and sending just screen updates to the using device. Thus, old 286's, hand-held devices, Macs, and the like can remotely access any Window's application through load balanced server farms. Microsoft licensed multi-user functionality from Citrix, but not ICA. The pICAsso add-on to Windows Server Terminal, formerly Hydra, is still needed for access from non-windows terminals and for load balancing, automatic software downloading, and other value-added features.
I do not understand the implications for Wind of QNX having ICA compatibility. But it is QNX that is adding ICA, not Citrix that is adding embedded software. It might be that any company that adds QNX to its information appliances will now have ICA compatibility automatically available if they have purchased Winframe or buy pICAsso for their servers and license the seats. If there is an advantage to QNX, WIND could presumably do the same thing with Citrix at little or no cost.
Citrix survives with Microsoft because they are technically much more proficient and add value to customers that MSFT does not supply. I agree that they appear to be securing rapid growth in the thin-client market that may reduce the need for NC. To me, as financially and technologically naive as I am, it appears that Citrix has carved-out a sweet spot in the software industry.
Best regard,
Don
|
