IT Employment

General discussion


Citrix or just Terminal Services

By ehuq ·
We have been deploying Citrix servers for a while now. But recently the question came up, why not just terminal server after we have deployed an application on Terminal server for a small non-profit low budget organization.
To me it seems like for5-10 user connections, Citrix becomes an overkill. The same task can be performed on Terminal server Application server mode. I understand that we cannot do the neat things like publishing of application, deployment over the web etc. But there is budget constraints, just Terminal Server seems like a good option.

I would like to get some more opinion on this, if anyone is facing the same dilemma.
Tito Huq

This conversation is currently closed to new comments.

Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Comments

Collapse -

Citrix or just Terminal Services

by Don Dean In reply to Citrix or just Terminal S ...

If you've already spent the money on Citrix (1.8?or MF XP 1.0s, a, or e edition?), and if you're getting the subscription advantage bonuses, why not just keep it? Citrix is more robust in general anyway and if your company grows, or decides to integrate the remote users with local users, it'll be transparent. Anyway just because you've already spent the money on Citrix, it's probably worth keeping just because of its outstanding performance, future scalability, the free add-on's such as NFuse(Web deployment can't be easier), and the convenience associated with printer driver auto-creation and its management.

Using a little bit of ASP, VBS, and XML code, I do believe it's possible to deploy apps over a web browser even w/o Citrix. If your end workstations are Windows XP, I understand that you don't have to purchase additional CAL's if you run TSE (RDP 5.0) alone.. It's WinXP and one other -- I think it was Win2K Pro's also - that can connect w/o the need to purchase a separate CAL - client access license for each seat. (correct me if I'm wrong!) - Don

Collapse -

Citrix or just Terminal Services

by Leptor In reply to Citrix or just Terminal S ...

I would test the bandwidth between the clients and your farm. The great thing about Citrix is that each user's minimum requirement is roughly 10Kb/s (Citrix says it's 8Kb/s) I do believe that Terminal services has a larger requirement. Also Citrixhas a much more powerful encryption and authentication over TS. I would stick with a lower level subscription (XPa on Citrix) rather than go to Windows TS any day, of course it has to depend on whether your users are internal (on the same LAN) or external (reside on WAN) and how good their internet connection is. ~ Leptor.

Collapse -

by sharon.vardi In reply to Citrix or just Terminal S ...


I am having the same conflict with a customer who needs to have ~100 concurrent connections to an application I am deploying and the access to it is over the Web. The connection to the site will be using VPN to the terminal server. I am not sure if the sizing methodology provided by Microsoft is good enough as it seems too slim. They claim that 270 knowledge workers can connect to a 4 way machine with only 4Gb of ram. This seems to me way too low. I was wondering how much more trouble it would be to try and implement Citrix for this solution.

The sizing document is on the MS website:

Related Discussions

Related Forums