Re: Microfocus COBOL 3.2.43 (16bit)
- From: "Richard" <riplin@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 22 Dec 2006 17:30:13 -0800
P. Raulerson wrote:
To be fair though, I did sound arrogant, and that was not intended. I
apologize for that. It is just that I tend to solve these kinds of issues
several times per quarter, and, if this case is what I think it is, using a
centralized VM to deal with this is probably a very good idea.
Given that they probably have Windows PCs everywhere they need them,
then taking the programs off those machines and loading them onto
sufficient new central machines with VMs may be just additional cost.
I think that it would be a very good idea to actually find out what the
application does, how it works, how many use it and where, before
thinking up pre-packaged 'solutions' that may be totally inappropriate.
On the other hand, to me, you sound like a PC person who has little
experience on other platforms.
I have done a decade with mainframes and nearly three decades with
departmental (Unix and other) servers, and with networked small
machines, and (overlapping) a decade of web server based systems.
Bet you would argue that running Microsoft
Office on standalone machines is faster than running it under Citrix.
(Hint: it is much faster under Citrix. :) Where are you coming from, and am
I anywhere close to right? :)
I wouldn't argue anything at all about Windows stuff, I try to avoid it
as much as possible having started developing for Windows 2 and getting
more disenchanted with each new version.
Whether MS Office is faster on a standalone or on a central server a)
depends entirely on the level or resources of each and on such things
as the speed of the connection and utilization and b) is not
partcularly interesting.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Microfocus COBOL 3.2.43 (16bit)
- From: P. Raulerson
- Re: Microfocus COBOL 3.2.43 (16bit)
- References:
- Microfocus COBOL 3.2.43 (16bit)
- From: UK-Contractor42
- Re: Microfocus COBOL 3.2.43 (16bit)
- From: P. Raulerson
- Re: Microfocus COBOL 3.2.43 (16bit)
- From: Richard
- Re: Microfocus COBOL 3.2.43 (16bit)
- From: P. Raulerson
- Re: Microfocus COBOL 3.2.43 (16bit)
- From: Richard
- Re: Microfocus COBOL 3.2.43 (16bit)
- From: P. Raulerson
- Microfocus COBOL 3.2.43 (16bit)
- Prev by Date: How does Citrix run it faster? was Re: Microfocus COBOL 3.2.43 (16bit)
- Next by Date: Re: Productivity
- Previous by thread: Re: How does Citrix run it faster? was Re: Microfocus COBOL 3.2.43 (16bit)
- Next by thread: Re: Microfocus COBOL 3.2.43 (16bit)
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|