Talk:Citrix XenApp

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 Old AfD 2 RDP based on Citrix tech? 3 UNIX 4 Deleted text 5 Name Change

[edit] Old AfD

This article has been listed on Wikipedia:Votes for deletion in the past. See /deletion for the discussion archive.

Why was this article listed for deletion? Was it by some nOOb? This is important information. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.137.28.156 (talk • contribs) 20:50, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

I don't know. I couldn't find a record of this debate in the AfD or VfD archives. The important thing is that the article wasn't deleted. — EagleOne\^Talk 19:00, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Looking at the history, there was a deletion request right back when the article was first created, as at that stage it was merely a copy-paste of an advertisement for the Citrix software.http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Citrix_XenApp&oldid=3934721 The article was promptly rewritten in encyclopaedic tone by DropDeadGorgias Adacore (talk) 09:32, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] RDP based on Citrix tech?

Windows NT 4 Terminal Server Edition and Windows Terminal Services are based on Ctrix technology (WinFrame?) but I thought Mircrosoft developed RDP on their own. Argel1200 00:01, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

I can't find any reference anywhere to suggest that RDP was based on Citrix, they seem to have totally separate code bases. I suppose it is possible Citrix played with a new protocol (what became known as RDP), and licensed it to MS, but they certainly didn't use it in their products. The statement about RDP seems to be almost completely out of place in this article, since RDP is definately not based on the ICA protocol. I'm going to remove the line unless someone says otherwise in the next while. --Zaf^(t) 05:37, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

No, it is not. See the link to MS RDP - the RDP protocol is based on T.128, which is why the rdesktop-project was able to reverse-engineer it since the T.128 spec was available. The only thing Microsoft licensed from Citrix was the server component (which is stated in the Competition section) 202.47.247.130 01:57, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] UNIX

I went and created a brief UNIX section. I did this because it is not a direct port off the Windows version, it used to be a separate product, and still is for those with Subscription Advantage. I also wanted to cover the MFU 1.1 FR2/MPSU 1.2 rebranding as it caused me a lot of grief (Citrix licensing support did not realize there was a distinction and I spent a month going back and forth over this). Argel1200 01:33, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Deleted text

I removed the following text from the article because it talks about the benefits of application hosting in general terms, not specifically about Presentation Server: "Centralizing applications also makes it easier for administrators to manage them." — EagleOne\^Talk 02:19, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Am I making things up or was there a reference to the Apache open-source alternative on this page until recently? If there was, any explanation for why it was removed. — Mcswordfish 13:52 21 Nov 2007 (GMT)

[edit] Name Change

Citrix will be changing the name of this product soon:

On Monday, February 11, 2008, Citrix will publicly announce that it is changing the name of its flagship application virtualization product from Citrix Presentation Server to Citrix XenApp™. This announcement will be made as part of our launch of Citrix Delivery Center™, a new, overarching product family brand for our premise-based application delivery infrastructure solutions.

The Citrix Delivery Center product family includes four primary product lines:

Citrix XenServer™, server virtualization product line, Citrix XenApp, app virtualization product line (formerly Presentation Server), Citrix® NetScaler®, Web app delivery product line, Citrix XenDesktop™, desktop delivery product line

Brandonsturgeon (talk) 20:26, 12 February 2008 (UTC)