[THIN] Re: Only allow specified apps.

  • From: "Jeff Durbin" <techlists@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 08:21:59 +1300

  Yeah, I agree with you. If every customer had an unlimited amount of money
to spend on IT, I would absolutely always recommend any and all 3rd party
products that made the work easier. However, I find that a winning proposal
often comes down to price, or at least has price as one of the major
decision factors, so a product that costs $1,500 per server in a 5 or 10+
server deal can add a big chunk to the bottom line. In some cases, the cost
of maintaining a solution using the native tools might be higher over the
long run, but then you're getting into TCO and ROI, which is often hard to
accurately prove, at least to the extent that you can get someone to pay
more money up front. 
  As an aside, it's kind of like RSA SecurID: I think it's one of the
greatest security products ever, and I could convince every single customer
that they should have it - it's truly an easy sell. But they price
themselves into a small segment of the market that can afford the
technology. Every customer I've ever showed it to has seen the value and
would use the product, until I tell them the price. Then most of them decide
that the risk of having the problem is more palatable than the cost of
having the product. If, on the other hand, SecurID tokens were $99 a year
(which is MORE than they get for them now) and the server software were
free, I think they'd have 10-20 times the installed base that they now have.

  As for 3rd-party products relating to Terminal Servers, I suppose it
depends on the foresight of the buyer and the ability to the salesman to
convince him that a 3rd party product is good in the long run. I can tell
you though, that the last integrator I worked for in the U.S. put certain
3rd party products on *every single* Citrix deployment quote, and our
salesmen were extremely knowledgeable and, I thought, great salesmen. Yet, I
would estimate that they sold it on maybe 1 out of 10 deals, so the
engineers had to be able to get the result without the 3rd party product. 
  I think the products were sold more often after the fact, when a customer
had had a system for a while and bumped into some of the problems and
frustrations that the products address.
  My two bits.


-----Original Message-----
From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
Of Braebaum, Neil
Sent: 9 December 2003 10:37 PM
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [THIN] Re: Only allow specified apps.

FWIW, I don't think you're wrong.

With mandatory profiles, scripting, GPOs and appsec you can do a pretty good
job at restricting what can be run.

However, it does require a reasonable amount of expertise, and investment in
time. Which can create a sorta of guru island. Nothing wrong with that,
simply something that has to be appreciated.

Commercial products can make much of this easier to deploy, without
requiring the same degree of expertise, a comprehensive solution, and a
feel-good, comfort-zone for management.

Horses for courses, I guess.


This Week's Sponsor - RTO Software / TScale
What's keeping you from getting more from your terminal servers? Did you
know, in most cases, CPU Utilization IS NOT the single biggest
constraint to scaling up?! Get this free white paper to understand the
real constraints & how to overcome them. SAVE MONEY by scaling-up rather
than buying more servers.
Useful Thin Client Computing Links are available at:
For Archives, to Unsubscribe, Subscribe or 
set Digest or Vacation mode use the below link:

Other related posts: