[THIN] Re: Flash on MF XPe 1.0

  • From: "Rob Slayden" <rslayden@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2006 16:10:27 -0700

Rick,
 
Thanks for the feedback. Of course, the way this started was we hired a
Manager of Development and he was not impressed with the app or the
supportive infrastructure, even at one point indicating that we just
need to replace the 4200 thin clients with desktop PCs and run the app
from the local browser. Of course, this would be over our 384K DSL VPN
links to the clubs! Guess the medicinal marijuana from his pharmacist is
really good quality! I sent the terminal server programming guidelines
over to him and told him that Flash and MetaFrame did not really play
nice, but he worked up a prototype and wowed the executive management to
the extent that they RIF'ed a department that would no longer be
necessary once the app development was complete. So here we are now
looking at options for picking up the slack. He is finally convinced
about the necessity to program for the infrastructure as our Network
Manager has already informed everyone that the network will not support
the deployment of this app and the bandwidth it requires.
 
Your idea to make the developers work from home over a dial-up
connection is a good one!! This should be a fun one...
 
rob
 

________________________________

From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Rick Mack
Sent: Wednesday, September 27, 2006 2:09 PM
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [THIN] Flash on MF XPe 1.0


Hi Rob,
 
I'm at a bit of a loss to understand the logic behind going for a
Flash-based application solution when your application delivery mecanism
is terminal services/Citrix and the end user devices are thin client
terminals. 
 
A richer user interface equates to a lot more "movement" and a lot more
bitmap updates. Unless you're executing Flash locally, I'm kind of
surprised there's only a 500% increase in bandwidth utilization :-(
 
Having said that, browser support in PS4 is heaps better than XP with
local JPEG image handling, lossy graphics rendition etc that equates to
much better IE performance in an ICA session. Provided of course you're
running the Version 8 client or later (not 100% certain but also 7.2 for
CE?). 
 
There are more improvements in store but while they'll make things a lot
faster, they're dependent on upgrading the ICA client on your thin
client devices and even then I'm not sure they'll make up a 500%
difference. 
 
The only way Flash should be considered as a viable application rollout
option in your scenario is if:
 
1) Your user base is attracted to the "richer" front end and this gives
you a significant commercial 
    advantage.
 
2) You use a  WAN bandwidth optimisation appliance. Considering some of
the claims, this might 
    provide a solution.
 
3) You throw out terminal services/Citrix and use the local browser only
on your thin client devices. 
    That means updating at least some of your thin clients to something
that will support a reasonably 
    up-to-date version of IE or Netscape with Flash support.
 
Of course the usual scenario is that you wouldn't have had a chance for
any input on the design etc of the new application and now it's your
fault if it doesn't work.
 
But it might be worth pointing out to the decision makers that you can
have a rich user interface without Flash, all it needs is the developers
realizing that bandwidth does matter. Make your developers work from
home using a dial-up connection. They'll soon get a feel for what's
acceptable.
 
regards,
 
Rick
 
Ulrich Mack 
Volante Systems 


________________________________

From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx on behalf of Rob Slayden
Sent: Thu 28/09/2006 5:37
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [THIN] Flash on MF XPe 1.0


I have a couple of questions for the list, both relating to Flash. We
are currently making development changes to our internal application
that runs on Citrix through a browser (IE is what we publish) and they
are coding much of it with Adobe Flex, which uses Flash 9 on the server
side. During the bandwidth testing we just completed, there was a 512%
increase in bandwidth utilization between the original non-flash version
of the app and the updated Flash 9/Adobe Flex version of the app. Our
server side is MF XPe 1.0 FR3/SP4 on Server 2003 (no SP1). The client
side terminals are Wyse 3350, 3360, 3125 and S30 terminals, so we have
CE 2.12 to CE.Net and ICA 6.20 through 9.04. My questions are as
follows:
 
1. Are there any tweaks or tunes that will help Flash run better in our
current environment?
2. Are the changes between XP 1.0 and PS 4.0 from a Flash perspective
enough to benefit users and reduce bandwidth? Note that we would likely
have to fork over about $1.5 mill to update our environment as we passed
on the SA and we would also have to upgrade about half of our terminals
in order to get 9.x ICA client support.
 
Any comments, ideas, suggestions, or alternatives would be greatly
appreciated.
 
Thanks!
 
rob

########################################################################
#############

This e-mail, including all attachments, may be confidential or
privileged. Confidentiality or privilege is not waived or lost because
this e-mail has been sent to you in error. If you are not the intended
recipient any use, disclosure or copying of this e-mail is prohibited.
If you have received it in error please notify the sender immediately by
reply e-mail and destroy all copies of this e-mail and any attachments.
All liability for direct and indirect loss arising from this e-mail and
any attachments is hereby disclaimed to the extent permitted by law.

########################################################################
#############

Other related posts: