>We are looking into installing a Citrix WinFrame for our office here at the University. Can anyone provide anecodotal experiences with WinFrame and Visual Fox Pro 5 apps/development? FPW 2.6? Any other experiences not related to VFP5 or FPW2.6?
>
>Any tidbits you can provide will be appreciated.
>
>Thank you in advance.
>
>-Jason

Here is part of an earlier thread...

>>>>Hi All -
>>>>
>>>>I've read most of the recent threads on Citrix & VFP. We're running a VFP application that contains pageframes and grids over Citrix. The remote offices (3 remote offices, average of 5 users at each remote office) are accessing the Citrix server at 56K. The performance is too slow. My question is, based on your experience, what is the minimum bandwidth we should have for acceptable performance of a VFP application with pageframes and grids?
>>>>
>>>>Thanks for your help.
>>>>
>>>>Steph
>>>
>>>Steph,
>>>
>>>What is the Citrix Server. I think your problems may be in the Server rather than the line. A fast enough server should work acceptably over phone lines.
>>>
>>>Rod Lewis
>>
>>The problem is not the server, but rather Fox as one UT member informed me. We utilize Citrix WinFrame effectively for DOS apps, GroupWise, and in-house developed Delphi application for Managed Care. We have had a similar problem with a small VFP application developed in house.
>>
>>WinFrame provides a thin-client by sending only screen refreshes and print jobs to the client workstations. Think of it as high powered multi-user version of PC AnyWhere or LapLink. As the one UT member informed me, VFP treats the forms as bitmaps, meaning any slight change to the form, even a label, would cause the entire form to undergo a refresh on the client workstation. Evidently, in the more mainstream Windows apps, the complete form does NOT refresh on the client side, only the part that changes. Thus, you cut down considerably on the bandwidth.
>>
>>Do not dismiss Citrix as a VFP developer. The technology will be incorporated in NT 5.0. Once code named Hydra, MS will utilize the technology to provide thin client computing as an answer to Oracle's NC and others...
>>
>>Regards,
>>Jack Mendenhall
>>Reinsurance Management, Inc.
>
>Jack,
>
>I guess it comes down to what is acceptable performance. From my standpoint, if it runs equivelant to the application over a standard network, I would consider it acceptable performance. Even with the whole screen going over the line, the bandwidth is still very small and a 56K line should be quite fast enough and large enough to handle the minimal bandwidth that a 5 user site would incur (unless there is a high volume of additional traffic, but that's a different issue).
>
>We have several large applications running on WinFrame, and our clients have been overall pleased with the performance in spite of the methodology implemented in VFP. One test is to compare the application running over the network to the application running over the Winframe client over the same network wires (eliminate the 56K line at this point). Is it comparable? If not, it may be time to check the Citrix Server and upgrade it with either more memory, a faster processor, or even another processor. There have been several instances where upgrading the hardware allowed the solution to be used and performance to be sustained.
>
>Rod Lewis

Rod has made a good point about the overall server hardware. We have a dual Pentium Pro (200 Mhz) box with 197 megs of RAM as well as a 2 gig SCSI hard drive. We also have two 100 Mbps 3COM NIC's going into a 100 Mbps HUB that in turn is connected to our 10/100 switch. The router that connects our California and Florida offices is on a HUB with other users in Florida, which is not perfect; however, performance of the WinFrame locally in Florida is quite good. As for our frame relay connection, it is 128 Kbps with a 64K CIR. At this time, the most users we have a one-time connected remotely is 7 to 8.

I have read that with 15 users on WinFrame that one might want to consider having at least two processors. I have personnally found that a dedicated 56K dial-up provides performance most similar to that of connecting locally over the LAN. I personally would not consider 56K for up to 15 people to be enough bandwidth, but then again, our processes are print intensive.

In reference to Stephanie Allemann's needs, I would suggest researching frame relay. It sounds as if she could have at least 15 users at one time hitting one WinFrame server.

Jack