There is nothing better than seeing the face of an eager IT salesperson when you tell them you’re all thin client. There is either the look of sheer confusion from those who’ve never heard of it, followed by “I see, but how many PC’s have you got?” to the look of fear from those who have heard of it. Very rarely have I witnessed someone rub their hands together, give me a big smile and ask “Great, Is that RDP or ICA?” This is particularly satisfying when the salesperson is trying to sell you some software that needs a dongle. “Just plug this into the back of the client machine” they say. “You mean the Server” I respond. “Uh?” is the usual response. This extends into surveys, “Could you tell me how many PC’s in your company” I am asked, to which I reply “We’re thin client based,” to which I’m met with an uneasy pause then “So how many PC’s do you have?” Nowadays I’m even getting users, eager with their new USB memory sticks approaching me in their droves; “Where I do I stick this?” - they may well ask.

Now of course we’re all talking virtualisation and rationalisation. I’ve spent so long convincing the powers that be that we need not only multiple redundant servers but we also need to run server software in isolation that we’ve built up a nice collection of servers both 32-bit and 64-bit. The thought of rationalising them down to one or two machines sends shivers down my spine. A few months back I bought a number of Hewlett Packard 64-bit DL380 servers with Windows Server 2003 for the task of splitting software from a heavily loaded domain controller. Unfortunately, this was just prior to the release of Windows Server 2003 R2 which comes with Virtual Server as part of the deal - but not as a free upgrade. Ouch. It doesn’t sound very rational to me.

Finally, the good old licensing issue has raised its head again. We need to upgrade our Exchange Server 2000 to Exchange Server 2007. Great, the software is only a few hundred pounds but what’s this? The client access licenses (CALs) take the price into thousands. “But we already have client access licenses” my Finance Director tells me. “Yes, but they are for the 2000 version and we need new ones for the 2007 version” I reply. At some level I see his point. We do indeed have client access licenses for email, but that’s not enough, we need them for a particular version of the server software. Would it not be better to let us get our feet wet by allowing the existing CALs to enable the basic features of 2007? Then, when the users demand more features we simply upgrade the CALs, much in the same way as upgrading from Standard to Enterprise CALs?