Skip to main content

MS Response to Why Not Promote VFP and Citrix

David Dee (see post from 9/22) asked MS about promoting VFP by discussing items with Citrix...As noted in his comments, the response from MS was:
We do not test VFP with Citrix and it is not something we are focused on as a solution, mainly due to lack of demand. For web (or thin client) applications with VFP, we are promoting VFP with ASP.NET using VFP 8.0 with Visual Studio .NET 2003 and that is working well, and most companies we talk to who need web front ends to VFP applications are using or considering ASP.NET with VFP combined. Thanks for your feedback.

Huh?!?! - Until such time as Desktop apps are killed off completely (don't see that happening anytime soon), I actually prefer to recommend Citrix or Terminal Server based solutions than purely Web-based.

Maybe David's problem was actually using the term "Citrix" instead of the more "MS-friendly" Terminal Server. VFP continually gets updated in service releases to better support Terminal Server applications(recall the NOBITMAP setting in SP3 for VFP 6). In fact, in one newsgroup, one of the fastest suggested ways to build a "mobile" app for the PocketPC was NOT to use SQL Server for PocketPC, etc but rather to build a Terminal Server (read: CITRIX-like) application and connect to it using the PocketPC's Terminal Server client. The only caution was "keep your screens really small".

It's the "MS response" that really hurts the community. Promoting VFP with ASP.Net is great for all those bleeding edge developers (and yes, I know it hurts to say it but for most people ASP.Net is still a little too bleeding edge for many companies  - note that not even MS bCentral allows SOAP access on their .Net services - wonder why not?).

The fact is that EVERY developer needs to be told of workable solutions. Citrix and Terminal Servers represent GREAT Solutions for companies who have remote needs and WORKING desktop applications. VFP is not only ideally suited in these environments - it kicks serious butt when it comes to  performance! Why? Because the application actually runs LOCALLY instead of being on a network.

Other reasons to consider Citrix/Terminal Server solutions:
1. It's easier to support - you can shadow other users, and easily disconnect users when connected.
2. Single point of access - easier to track errors, provide updates and more.
3. Single type of workstation - easier to manage. Hell, even better than trying to deal with multiple browsers
4. You can FIND many companies willing to HOST TS servers for you - yes, they may charge for it but will provide 24/7/365 uptime with various guarantees (check out

If you have never considered using Terminal Server as a remote solution for your apps, I strongly recommend it. AND it's getting easier and better. Don't be fooled by Microsoft's response - VFP does work well under Citrix and is always being improved to work better because of it. (just don't mention Citrix in the same breath <bg>)

Andrew MacNeill




Popular posts from this blog

FoxInCloud Stats

FoxInCloud sent this link a while back about their statistics regarding visits to their site:

What's interesting here is the breakdown of people. Yes, I think it's understandable that the Fox community is getting older.

Another factor is the growth of the mobile and web environments taking over development. These environments really do push people towards the newer non-SQL or free SQL/hosted environments but more towards hosted storage options like Amazon and Google. A tool like FoxInCloud that helps MOVE existing applications to the cloud inherently competes with those environments.

But FoxInCloud also allows developers to extend their application further by giving them a starting point using Javascript and the basic CSS (such as Bootstrap). If you're not rebuilding your application from scratch, it's certainly a great step forward.

Well, that explains CodePlex...

In a move that will be sure to anger open source (or rather anti-paid software, anti-Microsoft open source)  zealots, Microsoft is planning to buy GitHub.

A year ago, I mused about why Microsoft would shut down CodePlex and how the world needs competing source code repositories to be strong. I'm not the only one per this Slashdot article :
"...people have warned about GitHub becoming as large as it did as problematic because it concentrates too much of the power to make or break the open source world in a single entity, moreso because there were valid questions about GitHubs financial viability...." - Jacques Mattheij

I will be interested in seeing this play out - whether developers jump ship or not. Have all the efforts Microsoft has made in pushing towards open source be seen as genuine or will all the zealots jump ship or maybe even attack?

Microsoft's comment about why they shut down CodePlex referred to how spammers were using CodePlex. Well, GitHub has its own …

The World of Updates Today

I just received an update for Office 365. It certainly includes some cool features - including starting in one environment and picking it up in another environment. In recent years, I've certainly enjoined the use of Continuity on a Mac and in fact, I feel spoiled being able to start a message in one environment (even Google) and then finish it off on another.  This has become some pervasive when we were reviewing our most recent backlog at a client site, a similar feature was added to the current workload.

But with web applications, the trend is to reduce the amount of software on a client machine. I used to have automatic backup for all of my machines (thanks Carbonite!) but these days, many of my machines don't need anything beyond the core OS and some basic applications. Certainly that's the feeling with Chromebooks and even the lightweight aspect of many iOS apps. The functionality is mostly in the cloud.

When you upgrade your system, you expect it to a big update. So…