Re: CTXS and ASP Plans
"We believe that FLNK is one of few ASPs that is currently generating revenues through the rental of branded software applications. FLNK has chosen an operating platform developed by Citrix Systems,...., has launched its first server farm, and is currently signing up customers for its ASP services. This emerging industry is getting an increasingly high level of attention in the media and the financial markets,.....,Large technology companies and software producers, including Microsoft and Intel, have recently made announcements that they are evaluating software partnering deals and web-hosting businesses, respectively. We believe the market growth for ASP services is going to be explosive..."
--------------------------
BridgeTech & Thread,
I cut and pasted significant statements(re: CTXS) above. Most may realize this, but I thought I would point out another plus for CTXS, "IF," ASP services take off. You see CTXS technology allows ERP companies (or small software companies for that matter) to deploy their products via an ASP Provider WITHOUT having to do a rewrite of their current software products for deployment over a server centric system.
Another way to say it is that you don't have to rewrite your entire software to Java (remember Java is another server centric solution). So if a customer of an ASP Provider wants access to an ERP companies applications, but do not want to purchase the hardware and IT professionals to maintain it, they can go to an ASP and say, "I want that one." Well I believe if the ASP is deploying CTXS Metaframe, then the ASP can go to the ERP company and say, "Sell me your software, and I can deploy it instantly with no added work on your part to my customer."
I hope I got this right and I hope I made it clear. Really I wish CTXS would make it clear, but maybe they are feeling a bit paranoid and don't want to just spell out all their plans. I notice I have never read an analyst's commentary spelling out the ASP plans clearly. So the above is just my speculation.
ORCL did a LOT of work for their, i launch. Something I don't believe they would have had to do if they were willing to pay CTXS for their thin client/fat server products. If anyone can see where my thinking is flawed, please post. Like I said, I'm just trying to put together the pieces little by little.
Notice the reference to INTC. Of course the connection between CTXS and INTC is only vaguely implied. But can you imagine what a boost a CTXS would have if INTC had plans to deploy Metaframe!? That would truly be a paradoxical partnership, but certainly fantastic for CTXS. Talk about spreading the word on ICA features quickly. An endorsement by INTC would certainly do the trick.
MikeM(From Florida)
PS I like FutureLinks, "operating platform" reference to CTXS. Something I believe CTXS purposely avoids so they don't antagonize MSFT. I can't blame CTXS for that. |
