[THIN] Re: Buh-By Presentation Server...Hello XenApp Server
- From: "Nick Smith" <nick@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2008 14:28:31 +0000
Speaking as non-Citrix user who is continually bemused by the huge variety of
acronymic initials you big guys bandy about, - and I'm pretty techie - I have
to say it's a *much* better name. Doesn't matter too much to the techs, but the
management who have to authorise spend *will* be more likely to for XenApp than
Presentation Server, which just sounds....yeccchhh, dull, old-fashioned.
You want to get your budgets passed, start using the new name straightaway.
It'll sell.
From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
Rick Mack
Sent: 01 February 2008 09:49
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [THIN] Re: Buh-By Presentation Server...Hello XenApp Server
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<http://www.commander.com>
On Feb 1, 2008 6:57 AM, Bob Coffman - Info From Data Corp.
<bcoffman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto: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
Other related posts:
