On Wed, Jul 27, 2005 at 08:41:02PM -0700, Craig Bender wrote: > That's awesome! > I hear you on the softclient. I'm in your camp. I always try. Two > questions though (being serious here): > Would pay for a soft client? > If Sun Ray changed it's licensing that it was per connection (i.e. like > Citrix), how would you feel about that?
Hi Craig
Personally -- yes, I'd pay for a soft client. Why? Because it gets
into the total-value scenario -- I could issue my home users with the
soft client to run on their windows things, and over a VPN to a
dedicated Sun Ray client interconnect network, you would have all the
benefits of a remote user experience with practically none of the
hassles of having remote employees use their own spyware infested
home computers.
(breath)
OK, regarding the licensing -- how would a 'per-connection' licensing
scheme differ from the current (apparrent) 'per-user' licensing scheme?
--
/\oo/\
/ /()\ \ David Mackintosh | Public Key:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.xdroop.com/dave/gpg.html
$ gpg --recv-keys --keyserver subkeys.pgp.net 4C032504
Mystery attachment? http://xdroop.dhs.org/space/GPG
pgpsUAm25hIBC.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ SunRay-Users mailing list [email protected] http://www.filibeto.org/mailman/listinfo/sunray-users
