CLIENT CLASSIFICATIONS

The categories of client devices are shown in Table 7-2. Although client devices tend to be compared more commonly than client types, it is important to note that there is a great deal of overlap today with client devices. That is, both software and hardware exist today to convert a PC into a full thin client, and many of the new Windows terminals have local Web browsers and fully support client peripherals (via USB, parallel ports, and/or serial ports). Thus, they can be considered simple or even complex hybrid clients . Additionally, with the large number of new device types coming on the scene, like tablet PCs, handheld devices, Linux devices, and Windows CE tablets, it saves time to discuss client types (and include client devices that can fulfill that role) than to discuss only devices.

Table 7-2: Client Categories ^[*]

Client Category	Remote Applications	Supports Secure Access from Outside the LAN	Local Web Browser	Local Applications	Support Localof Local Peripherals	Local File Sharing
Thin client only	—	ˆ	ˆ		ˆ
Mobile user	—	—	—	—	ˆ	ˆ
Simple hybrid	—	—	—	—
Complex hybrid	—	—	—	—	—	—
[*] — Indicates that the client meets the requirement ˆ Indicates that the client could meet the requirement

The matrix of client types is meant to provide an idea of total cost of ownership (TCO) of the client type. For example, a Windows terminal that supports a local Web browser, peripheral devices, and a complex local OS (like Windows XP Embedded), and thus fits into the complex hybrid type, will be more expensive to procure , configure, manage, and maintain than a Windows terminal that simply supports an ICA client (even though both devices may be sold as a "thin client"). For the purposes of our discussion, neither device would be classified as a thin client. We only classify Windows terminals that support an ICA client as a thin client. It is also important to note that this client matrix does not define operating systems. If Citrix Presentation Server will be used, its support of hundreds of operating system variations ensures the use of Linux-based devices, Windows CEbased devices, as well as the more common assortment of Windows 95 through Windows XPbased devices. If only Windows Terminal Services will be used, the device choice becomes more limited.

Since total cost of ownership is not the only consideration when choosing which client type and client devices to support, a significant task in designing an access platform is to figure out which client types and devices will be procured and supported.