[THIN] Re: Buh-By Presentation Server...Hello XenApp Server
From: "Rick Mack" <ulrich.mack@xxxxxxxxx>
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2008 19:48:31 +1000
Hi Bob,
I couldn't get to Summit so I'm not under NDA about that stuff and can
speculate all I like without having to be as subtle as Steve ;-)
It does make sense. Presentation server is about application and session
virtualization, and Citrix Xen can now encompass all the different
virtualization layers that they've got from applications to servers. And
they'll all be called Xen something to connect them into a common concept,
virtualization.
When you think about it, while Winframe kind of made sense as a name,
Metaframe never did and I never really liked Presentation server. This name
change might actually be smart.
I guess it'll be interesting watching the renamimg process in the code,
since we'll get a pretty good idea of what engineering think by watching how
fast that happens.
And as a final word, as much as I like disagreeing with Citrix marketting,
it is kind of a cool name......
regards,
Rick
--
Ulrich Mack
www.commander.com
On Feb 1, 2008 6:57 AM, Bob Coffman - Info From Data Corp. <
bcoffman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Steve,
>
> That's all well and good, but someone should explain why Xen in the name?
>
> Right now, Presentation Server (or *Frame etc.) can run in a Virtual
> environment, or on a physical server.
>
> Is Citrix moving to require Xen to run FlagShipProduct, or are they
> modifying Citrix FlagShipProduct to run well on Xen, or creating a platform
> around a combination of FlagShipProduct & Xen, or what?
>
> To sum up, I think renaming FlagShipProduct again leads to market
> confusion....
>
> - Bob Coffman
>
