Kraft & Kennedy, Inc. provides technology and strategic consulting services to law firms, corporate legal departments and financial services firms. We can help you analyze, plan, implement and manage business and technology solutions to optimize your organization's functionality and processes.
|
| Kraft Kennedy has been providing technology and management consulting services to professional service firms and corporations for more than 20 years. Our team consists of experienced managers, CIOs, executive directors, lawyers, and technical experts who collaborate to offer a wide range of services to our clients. |
Sometime last year, Citrix released support for an integrated Web Interface for the NetScaler nCore. This was a welcome addition to the already versatile NetScaler appliance. Most of my clients had leveraged a couple Windows Server 2008 R2 hosts to serve as the Citrix Web Interface and used a NetScaler to load balance them. Integrating the Web Interface function within the NetScaler itself seemed like a no brainer as it reduces two Windows hosts (which need to be patched, managed, maintained, etc.) and unifies management on the NetScaler appliance itself. The idea of replacing the Web Interface on a NetScaler sounds like a great idea at first blush, but the Web Interface is usually branded and customized to at least some degree that poses a challenge. Specifically, most of my clients perform at least some level of customization to their Web Interface. This might be something as simple as adding a logo or disclaimer, deploying the Online Plugin, or something more involved that includes adding multiple links and changing to a custom skin. Citrix’s own documentation is lacking when it comes to making these customizations on the NetScaler and Web Interface in the form of disparate knowledge base articles. In practice, most Citrix administrators (myself included) would likely feel more comfortable customizing a Web Server running under the IIS platform over one running on Apache Tomcat, so in this post I step through different ‘basic’ customizations that I expect every organization would want to do if they had a NetScaler nCore running the integrated Web Interface.
(One last thing to note, to be fair, there are some Citrix KB articles that document some of the steps below that I used to help me compile some of this information, but it is not as organized and is disparate.)
Continue reading…
|
|
Why is VDI as a desktop replacement a non starter for so many law firms? I attempt to answer this question pointedly in this post based on my experience over the last 18 months when talking to different law firms about VDI. However, let me take a step back and frame the question. While I don’t have actual statistics, I would make the statement that most law firms are still on Windows XP and have thought about or are planning a Windows 7 desktop in the near future. Invariably, this will result in the firm entertaining a VDI (for desktop replacement) solution for their planned Windows 7 desktop. The conversation usually doesn’t get far after that…. Why is that? This post is a look at why VDI environments are non starters in law firms or specifically, why they have not seen the traction that the industry (Citrix, VMware, Gartner) would have you to believe. I’ll preface once again that VDI might be seeing traction in other industries, however I’ll focus on the five reasons why I feel VDI is not gaining traction in the legal space.
(As an aside, this post is only talking to VDI and in particular as a desktop replacement and not other use cases that may include, but are not limited to training rooms, war rooms, remote access, etc.)
Continue reading…
|
|
Another month, another new build of the Netscaler. It seems that every month Citrix has a new incremental build of the Netscaler. A few weeks ago, version 9.3 of the Netscaler (and along with the VPX) was released. While these incremental builds are usually not blog worthy, 9.3 introduces some features, changes that are important to note as well as my thoughts on upgrading from a previous version.
Upgrading to Netscaler 9.3
It was a no brainer upgrading my 9.2 VPX 1000 Netscalers (running the “classic” code) to 9.3 by downloading the update from Citrix and following the GUI wizard. The process took less than 20 minutes and went without error or any downtime since my Netscalers are setup in an HA pair. It was pretty straightforward to perform a failover, upgrade, and repeat.
What is important to note is that after version 9.3 there will be no new releases of the Netscaler “classic” code in favor of the “nCore” code. To provide some background, with the release of Netscaler 9.2 last year, Citrix made their nCore code available to the VPX appliances as it was previously only available for the physical MPX boxes. At the same time, the existing code set was dubbed “classic” and each new revision of 9.2x was released in both classic and nCore flavors. The change also bumped up the minimum requirements of the Netscaler VPX from 1 vCPU and 1 GB of RAM (running on classic) to a heftier 2 vCPU and 4 GB of RAM if you are running nCore. For environments leveraging some of the advanced content caching and acceleration features, nCore might make sense, however for ones using the Netscaler for ICA/SSL proxy and application level load balancing, there is limited value in the nCore code. (I don’t care to go into the specific improvements to the code, architecture that nCore brings over classic, but feel free to read this Citrix Whitepaper if you are interested.) The notable here is that after version 9.3, Citrix will no longer be releasing updates to the “classic” version of the code, thus forcing you to run nCore going forward.
Continue reading…
|
|
Last week, I installed the Citrix XenClient on a test laptop and got a chance to play around with it further. To recap, this is Citrix’s Type 1 client side hypervisor to solve the offline VDI problem that currently exists for XenDesktop. I posted six months ago when the product was announced at Synergy, but last month Citrix released the 1.0 version of the product, so I figured I would give it a whirl.
Continue reading…
|
|
The 12.1 Online Plugin was released last week. Apart from the number of bug fixes that generally come with the new version of the Online Plugin, this version brings dynamic client printer mapping (HDX Project Laser) to XenApp 6. To review, traditionally XenApp would only populate client (auto-created) printers on the user’s login. If a printer is added locally after a user session was already established, it would not be available within the XenApp session unless the user logged off and on again. With this 12.1 plugin on the client side and the XenApp Printing Optimization Pack installed on the XenApp 6 server, this functionality is recognized.
|
|
The rumors have been going on for years. The Citrix Secure Gateway is no longer going to be developed or supported. This rumor was prevalent four years ago when XenApp 4.5 was released and continues to be bounced around today. ‘No’, Citrix has not stopped developing the CSG and the rumors have never been substantiated. Citrix has actually been incrementally updating it with updated releases of XenApp and XenDesktop.
So why do I think is this rumor relevant again? Last week, Citrix released the Citrix Access Gateway VPX 5.0. Along with this release came a significant licensing change that cuts into the CSG’s value. The Access Gateway’s “Platform License” ($995 retail) includes unlimited connections to XenApp/XenDesktop through the Access Gateway. The “Universal” CALs (Access Gateway licenses) still exist, but now differentiate the VPN, Smart Access other traditional AG features.
Continue reading…
|
|
Wyse unveiled the “Xenith” thin client device last week at Synergy. And unlike Wyse’s other thin client devices for Citrix that run Windows XPe or Windows CE, the “zero” client runs an ultra thin firmware (<5 Mb). This thin firmware means the device boots up instantly and has minimal management. A demo at Synergy last week showed the thing boot up in less than 5 seconds. What else separates the Xenith from traditional thin client devices? Full HDX support including HDX MediaStream (including Flash), HDX Plug-n-Play (USB redirection) and HDX RealTime (bi-directional audio). The expectation being that as Citrix upgrades and improves HDX features in the future, the Xenith’s firmware will be able to be upgraded to provide this support. Firmware and asset management can be done through Wyse Device Manager and availability is expected in June with a price point at around $330.
The Xenith isn’t out yet, but seems very promising with HDX support, thin firmware, minimal management and an attractive price point. If a firm is considering a VDI environment with XenDesktop in the next 6 months, the Wyse Xenith is definitely worth a look.
|
|
In Q4 last year, Citrix made its NetScaler physical appliances available as a virtual appliance. Labeled as the “VPX”, the full featured virtual iteration of the appliance dropped its price point and made it more accessible to SMB customers. Citrix has now made the Access Gateway (CAG) and Branch Repeater physical appliances also available as VPXs. At this point, Citrix has made three of their ‘core’ Networking products available as VPX appliances, which are recapped below.
Citrix NetScaler VPX
Citrix Access Gateway VPX
Citrix Branch Repeater VPX
|
|
This week at Citrix Summit/Synergy, Citrix finally revealed details behind their much anticipated client (bare metal) hypervisor. To recap, for the folks who are not following, this will finally bring “offline VDI” to XenDesktop. It will also match (and potentially beat) VMware’s current offline VM checkin/check out functionality currently available in View.
|
|
With Server Based Computing and consolidation becoming increasing prevalent along with the enormous buzz of VDI, I think it is worth debunking some of common myths of XenApp and Terminal Server. Below are the most common misconceptions that I continue to hear from IT folks today on the limitations of XenApp/Terminal servers that I have debunked from real world experience supporting and working with different terminal server environments.
Myth 1: Application compatibility is a huge problem on Terminal Servers.
There might have been some truth to this myth a decade ago, but in reality this is just not a big problem in the 2003/2008 world. From my first hand experience, I can say that an application that works on XP will work on 2003, what works on Vista, will work on 2008, etc. Are there some exceptions? Of course. However, these applications are few and far between, yet the “application compatibility” myth continues to circulate. This myth was probably true in the NT/2000 OS where applications did not do a good job of differentiating between “user” and “computer” parts of an installation. Since Windows XP, application developers have done a better job writing “user” specific information in the user profile and “machine” specific information in Program Files, or HKLM. I would probably attributed to the “Fast User Switching” feature introduced in XP. Whatever the reason, this is just not a problem anymore.
|
|
2
Back to top