>I really don't know what Citrix gives you over Terminal Server. It used to be a lot - but Terminal Server has come a long way. I would suggest looking closely at the differences.
>

True, and we have been looking. Citrix just makes sense on a larger scale (easy load balancing, easy file sharing, easier printing, better user management).

>1) Yes, one user running a large unoptimized report will take away processor from another user - Look for SYS(3050) for memory.

We would definitely do that, but the CPU was the real question.

>2) Figure 128mb (min) for each user - remember that each user gets his own XP Session.

I was thinking Citrix lets you setup an icon on user's desktop that launched a remote app directly in a single window without giving him an entire "remote desktop". That is the way we would like to go, and that would not require as much.

>3) You do not need to figure what VFP uses for bandwidth - as far as what you send to your client from VFP = 0. You are only sending the image of the screen. I would suggest getting a sniffer and checking it.

I have been running some basic TS tests on our in-house server and monitoring the Outbound/Inbound bytes over a short period. Interestingly, the bytes really jump in leaps when the user scrolls a window with bar or mouse wheel instead of page keys (it make sense that a page change refreshes once, but scrolling is a whole lot of incremental changes). I've also heard that the Citrix client has more intelligent algorithms than TS's, thereby creating more efficient bandwidth usage.

>4) Sorry... you will need to do your own calculations - I don't know.
>
>It might benefit you to contract a consulting firm to help you do this - one that has done terminal based implementations before.
>

Being short on time I figured I'd see if anybody else has done outsourcing like this already and could give me his two cents worth. I am looking at testing with one Citrix shop, but haven't arranged anything yet.

Thanks for your input.