> if you want rich fluid client behaviour, you’re fooling yourself if you think any kind of hybrid “server only” approach is the best. It’s not. You cannot beat

> if you want rich fluid client behaviour, you’re fooling yourself if you think any kind of hybrid “server only” approach is the best. It’s not. You cannot beat native apps for functionality. Where does something like Microsoft Remote Desktop Services fit into this location-of-state model? It’s a classic thin client app, but you can run it in “RemoteApp” mode, where instead of remote controlling a full Windows session, you only see a single app’s window, making it largely indistinguishable from running a native app. It can be setup where the user sees, say, an Excel icon on their desktop, and the average user virtually cannot tell if they’re running a native app or a remote app. The experience is surprisingly good. Even over higher latency connections, I’ll notice slow server hardware before I’ll notice network latency. On the flip side, if we allocate a lot of server resources to a remote app, where a user is doing data analysis on a large data set, they will absolutely prefer the remote app. Point being, the latency tends to be a non issue.