Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Citrix Systems (CTXS) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: MikeM54321 who wrote (6715)	6/30/1999 8:36:00 AM
From: Mike Buckley	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 9068

And if MSFT really pushes Terminal Services, who knows how that will effect Citrix? That's probably the biggest question of all. I agree. Microsoft is a potentially bigger and more immediate threat to Citrix than Java. As much as I'd like to think Microsoft appreciates the need to work with Citrix in their mutual battle against Java, I fear that Microsoft is arrogant enough not to perceive the need for Citrix. On the other hand, at no time in the history of Microsoft have they been more aware of the need to create the perception that they aren't creating illegal monopolies. This works in Citrix's favor. --Mike Buckley

To: MikeM54321 who wrote (6715)	6/30/1999 11:48:00 AM
From: mauser96	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 9068

And did you notice that there were several other interesting articles available at the networkcomputing.com site? And then there is the thinplanet site. Citrix has an informative www page but little helpful to say on Java except that they do license it and that "MetaFrame also supports non- Windows clients including DOS, UNIX,Mac OS, Java..." so they imply here that it's just another client OS. I haven't had time to go over the article I posted yet but will do so today and also double read your posts. I'm beginning to think that the whole Citrix question is similar to an onion. Just when you think you have the answer you find another layer. It seems to me than many of the non CTXS solutions are like a military $1500 toilet. It works, it may even be an elegant solution to a problem, but we already have toilets so why spend the money to design a new one? Furthermore this toilet is here now, and we know it works. A lot of this is political and psychologic. MSFT is beginning to reap what they sewed. Almost everybody in the industry hates them and are willing to go to a lot of trouble to avoid them (and I'm a MSFT shareholder)This is especially true of engineers and journalists. When it comes down to management actually spending the money though, they may tend to hold their nose and choose the CTXS solution, just as they chose Dells over Apples.

To: MikeM54321 who wrote (6715)	7/3/1999 3:19:00 PM
From: mauser96	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 9068

MikeM, I spent some time over on the ORCL thread and at the ORCL home page trying to grasp the point of Oracle8i.As far as I can see this is "based purely on HTTP, HTML, JAVA" and won't run any Windows program. The target market is mobile computing, and the so called Java virtual machine runs only inside the Oracle data base, and in fact it is referred to by the company as "the data base of the future" (Larry Ellison is not known for his reticence and modesty <<gg>>.) One otherwise glowing review mentioned an extended learning period, certainly not a problem with CTXS. I must admit to an anti- Ellison bias, but comparing this to CTXS may be a bit of an apples and oranges thing at this time Since I have a lot of CTXS, I'm at risk for another more subtle bias, ownership. All of the real alternatives to the CTXS system seem to have serious flaws, or they exist mostly in the imagination. Imaginary products are easy to make perfect. On page 3 of the networkcomputing.com article I linked earlier it lists the reasons to support a www or Java approach. These are 1)capitalize on anti MSFT sentiment 2) because application processing is distributed to desktop computers it's more scalable #) fits more with the trend to the Internet. Of the above number 2 is false, and the other two are more emotional than anything else. Investments that are cut and dried with no uncertainty are not likely to be very profitable. In this case we have little hope of getting really superior information, so our path has to be better understanding and interpretation. I see no reason why CTXS can't incorporate the www as needed, but the fact is that 90% of the really useful PC apps are written for Windows. Java makes nice little cartoons and small programs but as far as I know there is no Java app anything close to a program like Word. So far nothing I have read alters my view that CTXS is offering the best low cost of ownership (this is the key) solution available for most companies. Please feel free to pick apart anything in the above, I'm delighted to have informed input. On another subject-- it appears that there is a good chance that MSFT will be declared an official "monopoly" as a result of the trial. This should be good news to those that are worried about MSFT competition, because this will reduce the chances of MSFT predatory behavior toword CTXS in the future.