* Dr. Internet columnists Steve Blass offers some thoughts on server-based client apps
We are thinking about setting our Windows clients (2000 and XP) to open a virtual session to a server where all the applications are loaded. The clients would boot up using a local operating system, then access any applications by opening a session to th
We are considering setting our Windows clients (2000 and XP) to open a virtual session to a server where all applications are loaded. The clients would boot up using a local operating system and then access applications by opening a session to the server. Software upgrades would only be performed on the server. Is this a good idea?
The biggest problems are application network awareness and network latency.
Running applications from a network server requires network-aware applications. Another approach is to use terminal services, which let you use workstations like dumb terminals and run everything on the server, but you need a server for every 10 to 20 simultaneous users, maybe 50 for low-intensity applications.
Licensing can be expensive. I would look at Group Policy Objects (https://www.computing.vt.edu/infrastructure_services/hokies_domain/central_services/creatinggpo.html) implementations, which could manage client update controls through Windows Update Services rather than relying on server horsepower and WAN connectivity into business-critical applications.
You want to position people to keep working when the network is down. The Internet is unreliable. For some applications, it seems a waste not to leverage automatic update services and the PC horsepower available on the desktop.
