I see your point of view, but at the same time the full Citrix offering is a very compelling set of functionality and features from a single vendor. I am just finishing an implementation of a dual data center solution with Netscaler, CAG, AAC, WI and PS - all fully redundant and fault tolerant. This is a very compelling platform that the other products simply cannot do. Granted these products are not cleanly and fully integrated, but within a version or two they will be and there will simply be nothing like it out there- especially from a single vendor. So instead of saying Citrix watch out, I think a whole range of other vendors need to watch out for Citrix- including MS. Remember, if MS ever goes sour on Citrix, Citrix can always play the LINUX card and drop the licensing costs by an order of magnitude to the end user!! With a minimum of software development Windows apps can be running on LINUX in various emulation and virtualization modes. As far as MS buying Softricity, that is a sensible scenario but Softricity has a lot of issues with the way the do business, they are more likely to self implode then develop beneficial partnerships?. Steve Greenberg Thin Client Computing 34522 N. Scottsdale Rd D8453 Scottsdale, AZ 85262 (602) 432-8649 www.thinclient.net steveg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx _____ From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Douglas A. Brown Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2006 1:58 PM To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: [THIN] Re: Microsoft buys SSL VPN Company..... Man, I?ve been saying this for awhile now and I?m working on an article that details why I believe it but SoftGrid is going to be owned by Microsoft by the end of 2006. I feel it in my bones. Microsoft needs them. They need a solution that can take SMS over the top; they need a solution that will get them into the virtualization market in a big way. Microsoft can do two things with it. 1) Add it to SMS. They will then kill Altiris and Tarpon 2) Add it to Longhorn and Vista. They could give it away as a feature to Longhorn and Vista and as a value prop to upgrade? Now, I would upgrade for truly virtualized apps. If they did this then I could use TS 2007 with SoftGrid/SMS to manage my entire app base, everywhere! If I?m remote I use TS, if I?m local I use my workstation and then all apps are deployment and monitored through SMS / MOM. That brings us to MOM/SMS integration, which is planned? Not to mention with this I have one support contract, from Microsoft. So, that being said, mark my words? Microsoft SoftGrid coming soon. So, what about Citrix? Microsoft SSL VPN vs. CAG, Tarpon vs. Microsoft, MetaFrame vs. Microsoft? That is not good or Citrix, no matter what. I think the Citrix channel is huge and for the most part I think that the Citrix channel is blind to anything but Citrix but even with them I think Citrix will have a hard time? They will become Oracle, a big boy that is bought because you need to buy it? Do you buy Oracle because you want to? No, you buy it because you have no choice? Oh, let?s not forget the Citrix ecosystem? With the Reflectent purchase Citrix just made enemies of about 5 different companies, with the UPD III they made enemies of about 3 to 4 companies and the others are scared that Citrix will buy something and then that hurts them where they live. So, these ISV partners are ready to move to someone else too?. So, 2007 will be interesting? it will?. That is my humble opinion?. I?m curious about yours?. Douglas A. Brown President and Chief Technology Officer Microsoft MVP, Windows Server DABCC, Inc. Phone: (954) 778-9558 Fax: (248) 479-0621 E-mail: <mailto:dbrown@xxxxxxxxx> dbrown@xxxxxxxxx Web: <http://www.dabcc.com/> http://www.dabcc.com _____ From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Cláudio Rodrigues Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2006 4:14 PM To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: [THIN] Re: Microsoft buys SSL VPN Company..... For anyone that has deployed their e-gap solution, they are by far the Rolls-Royce of this type of solution/appliance on the market. CAG is good but not as polished as e-gap. The next logical step is Microsoft acquiring Softgrid. That would be very interesting. Microsoft/Whale/Softgrid versus Citrix/CAG/Tarpon? :-) Cláudio Rodrigues Microsoft MVP Windows Server - Terminal Services _____ From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Douglas A. Brown Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2006 3:26 PM To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: [THIN] Microsoft buys SSL VPN Company..... A bit off subject but not really?. Did you guys see that Microsoft just acquired a SSL VPN company??? Weird, hardware? but it is a Windows based VPN? unlike the CAG that is Linux. To learn more check this out: http://www.dabcc.com/dabcc/webapplication/aspx/dabcc.content.aspx?intPKText= 1921 <http://www.dabcc.com/dabcc/webapplication/aspx/dabcc.content.aspx?intPKText =1921&intPKChannel=13> &intPKChannel=13 What do you think?? I think this is going to be very interesting for Citrix as they are going to compete with Microsoft in the SSL VPN (CAG) and the app deploy (Tarpon) markets? DB Douglas A. Brown President and Chief Technology Officer Microsoft MVP, Windows Server DABCC, Inc. Phone: (954) 778-9558 Fax: (248) 479-0621 E-mail: <mailto:dbrown@xxxxxxxxx> dbrown@xxxxxxxxx Web: <http://www.dabcc.com/> http://www.dabcc.com _____ From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Steve Greenberg Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2006 3:22 PM To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: [THIN] Re: New Access Gateway / AAC bits I don?t recall the license port, but it is the standard one and is in the documentation. When you enable AAC mode the CAG?s no longer require an explicit license entry, the AAC takes that over as well as most other functions. You can secure the communication between CAG and AAC with SSL port 443 or just 80 and 9005 for management?.. Steve Greenberg Thin Client Computing 34522 N. Scottsdale Rd D8453 Scottsdale, AZ 85262 (602) 432-8649 www.thinclient.net steveg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx _____ From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of l.bagdasarian@xxxxxxxxxxx Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2006 10:24 AM To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Cc: Steve Greenberg Subject: [THIN] Re: New Access Gateway / AAC bits Thanks Steve.. I didn't know that the Presentation Server license Server can be used to license CAGs. What ports is it communicating to the CAGs: is it citrix port? Can it be changed to 443? If we think to add AAC later, can we continue using a Presentation License Server or we need to move it to the AAC license Server? Thanks again Larisa -------------- Original message -------------- From: "Steve Greenberg" <steveg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> With CAG 4.2 you can actually use the same Citrix license server you use for Presentation Server if you want to. In this case, it is the standard netbios name of the server, i.e. just the machine name (you can type hostname at the command line to see this) Alternately, you can upload the license file into the CAG box itself. In that case you use the value entered is in the filed called ?FQDN? on the network setup screen. When doing this the licenses, and the cert by the way, are included in the backup file so be sure to save off the config, this could save you a lot of work if you ever have a hardware failure or have to rebuild the boxes. If you already have a Citrix licensing server I recommend using it when you have more than one CAG. Also note that the when you fulfill your license file from www.mycitrix.com <http://www.mycitrix.com/> you do have to provide the license server hostname. However, these licenses can be returned and reallocated to a different hostname if needed. Regards, Steve Greenberg Thin Client Computing 34522 N. Scottsdale Rd D8453 Scottsdale, AZ 85262 (602) 432-8649 www.thinclient.net steveg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx _____ From: l.bagdasarian@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:l.bagdasarian@xxxxxxxxxxx] Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2006 2:23 PM To: steveg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: FW: [THIN] Re: New Access Gateway / AAC bits Steve, Can you answer this quick question, for me please. We just received 2 new CAGs and I need to set them up as quickly as possible. I am fairily new to Citrix and didn't work with the CAGs yet. ( I've impelmented the software version of CSG in our env.)) The documenation on CAG is pretty detailed. The question I have is about the licensing. As I understand, once you download it with the wrong host name -its unpossible to change it. ??? I am in the process of downloading the CAG licenses and need to enter the host name. What do I use? Is it the URL (common name) that is assigned to our external DNS? like hostname.insurity.com? I don't see any other host names that is being assigned to the CAGs. Thanks in advance. -------------- Forwarded Message: -------------- From: "M" <mathras@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> To: <thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Subject: [THIN] Re: New Access Gateway / AAC bits Date: Sat, 13 May 2006 15:39:10 +0000 Mind expanding upon the enterprise deployment components ? Are you doubling things up for failover ? Seperate AAC components ? Using Netscaler ? ----- Original Message ----- From: Steve <mailto:steveg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Greenberg To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Sent: Saturday, May 13, 2006 4:54 PM Subject: [THIN] Re: New Access Gateway / AAC bits Great timing, right in the middle of an Enterprise deployment and seeing some of these issues! thanks Steve Greenberg Thin Client Computing 34522 N. Scottsdale Rd D8453 Scottsdale, AZ 85262 (602) 432-8649 www.thinclient.net <http://www.thinclient.net/> steveg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx _____ From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of M Sent: Saturday, May 13, 2006 1:15 AM To: Thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: [THIN] New Access Gateway / AAC bits 4.2.2 released http://support.citrix.com/article/CTX108902 New AAC Update http://support.citrix.com/article/CTX109402 _____ The information contained in this e-mail message is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the recipient(s) named above. This message may be an attorney-client communication and/or work product and as such is privileged and confidential. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or an agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received this document in error and< BR>that any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail, and delete the original message.