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: WinWiz who wrote (7249)	11/22/1999 5:20:00 PM
From: Zed	Respond to of 9068

Great analysis by WinWiz By the way the GraphOn patent number 5831609 is available for viewing free (or downloading for $3) on IBM's patent site patents.ibm.com Z

To: WinWiz who wrote (7249)	11/22/1999 6:19:00 PM
From: MikeM54321	Respond to of 9068

"That patent could spell trouble for Citrix, as it might hamper, or even eliminate, Citrix's ability to go after the Windows server to non-Windows client market, which would be bad news if you assume that Microsoft will eventually 'own' the market for remoting Windows apps from Windows 2000 servers to Windows client devices." WinWiz, That was a great analysis of the patent claim. Thanks very much. As far as CTXS revenues from the specific market you describe above, I don't believe (but am not certain), they are significant. The market allegedly under GraphOn's newly acquired technology, is never mentioned in any Citrix's CCs I've listened to. And I've listened to at least a years worth of them. I'm just not sure it's a big part of CTXS revenues? Most don't know this but WinFrame is just about $0 to CTXS now. I for one, would not be surprised if the dissimilar UI's market for MetaFrame/WinFrame, is insignificant. MikeM(From Florida)

To: WinWiz who wrote (7249)	11/22/1999 6:50:00 PM
From: James Sinclair	Respond to of 9068

WinWiz, Nice overview of the patent issue. Couple of points: dynamic method of converting a workstation UI API call-set, such as Windows, to another, such as X or Java Do we know that Citrix uses dynamic API call translation in their non-Windows ICA clients? I wouldn't be surprised, but I can't say for sure that there isn't some other way of implementing the client. That patent could spell trouble for Citrix, as it might hamper, or even eliminate, Citrix's ability to go after the Windows server to non-Windows client market Seems to me that the worst case scenario from Citrix's point of view would be a licensing arrangement. I'd be surprised if GraphOn is really out to replace Citrix. Remember that would put them into the same competition with MSFT that Citrix currently faces. A nice high margin royalty stream seems to make more sense from their perspective. if you assume that Microsoft will eventually 'own' the market for remoting Windows apps from Windows 2000 servers to Windows client devices MSFT will still have a long way to go to totally replace Citrix after they release Win2000. Check out the link below for Citrix's latest take on a head-to-head feature comparison. 204.127.239.83 Of course MSFT could try to add all the missing features. One does wonder how aggressively MSFT will come after Citrix as long as Judge Jackson is looking over their shoulder.

To: WinWiz who wrote (7249)	11/22/1999 7:56:00 PM
From: David Perfette	Respond to of 9068

The patent is not meant to address remoting 'transport' protocols themselves (such as ICA & RDP). It deals with the idea of conversion between UIs...a dynamic method of converting a workstation UI API call-set, such as Windows, to another, such as X or Java, for the purpose of remote display and interaction. Instead of going after a claim for the whole thin client concept they are going after a specific idea within that concept. It still sounds ridiculous to me. I think there is a bit of a parallel between this situation and apple's claim, way back when, against microsofts use of the windows gui. If anything, I think there was more merit to that case. If we extend this logic, why just patent the "idea of the conversion between ui's"? Why not patent the whole idea of computing? The makers of the first Alter computer could say, hey, we thought of it first, and try to lay claim to the rights for any and all environments that involve the use of electricity with IC's, transistors, or whatever, to assertain or discern information. On another slant. What's there to prevent Citrix from then patenting or laying claim to the rights to "the remoting of Windows applications from a Windows server to a Windows client workstation"? that could potentially put Gojo in a world of hurt. -David P. btw. Citrix was left off of the Street.com B2B list.