Comments on: The Citrix Universal Print Server and its limitations?

By: Citrix Training CXD-203 extra info links – B-CrITical

Citrix Training CXD-203 extra info links – B-CrITical — Mon, 26 Mar 2018 13:39:40 +0000

[…] The Citrix Universal Print Server and its limitations? = WWW […]

By: XenApp DevOps Guy

XenApp DevOps Guy — Fri, 10 Jan 2014 01:22:25 +0000

We’ve implemented UPS because we have dependencies on UNC printing, and won’t install drivers on the XenApp boxes. Enterprise wide we have over 22,000 print queues, over 10,000 employees. And it’s a hospital: definite paper hogs. 50 jobs is not a biggey because >50 get queues, not dropped. So far, the UPS has been a good fit becuase UNC print server queues on Windows clients get inherited in users sesssions and the queues that can’t be inherited fall back to CUP which has been almost flawless since the PS4 days.

That’s my 2 cents worth.

Oh. yeah. Citrix now supports UPS load balancing with a Netscaler now (or imminently).

By: 2013 recap, here comes 2014! • My Virtual Vision

2013 recap, here comes 2014! • My Virtual Vision — Tue, 31 Dec 2013 09:25:37 +0000

[…] The Citrix Universal Print Server and its limitations? […]

By: Andrew Gerrie

Andrew Gerrie — Thu, 19 Sep 2013 08:35:25 +0000

I can’t quite work out if the UPS works inside the ICA channel (client printers only) or outside of it.

If the UPS client sits on the VDA or the XenApp server then I guess it can work outside of the ICA channel and doesn’t rely on the Receiver. I’m mainly interested in the compression rather than driver management but if the jobs are compressed on the VDA in the datacentre then sent over the WAN to the print device in a remote office, surely something needs to decompress it at the remote site before printing which is something Receiver would handle if using the UPD instead.

By: Sebastian

Sebastian — Mon, 12 Aug 2013 16:03:09 +0000

Thanks for you blog, I’m currently facing a printer re-design project. So I’m looking into the docs and your blog really was a good source. After all I’m probable stick with the current MS solution 🙂

By: Jonathan Pitre (@PitreJonathan)

Jonathan Pitre (@PitreJonathan) — Mon, 05 Aug 2013 07:01:18 +0000

I tested UPS 1.0 for quite some time and with Xerox and HP UPD the spool service just crashes.

Apparently one of Citrix UPS developer quits, that would explain why they aren’t putting much effort into the product.

I would recommend you take a look at Tricerat Project Thorx, it’s really impressive so far. It’s printing 2.0 in my view. 🙂

Citrix needs to improve UPS quickly or buy a company that’s does it right because they are way behind the competition and this nightmare must stop. All the new XD7 features are great but please let’s fix the basics first.

By: Ingmar Verheij

Ingmar Verheij — Wed, 31 Jul 2013 11:06:11 +0000

Hi Kees,

Good summary of the current status of the Citrix Universal Printer Server as part of the XenDesktop 7 offering. I would have expected that with the release of XD7 the UPS would be a native part of the installation and not a separate component, that’s unfortunate. It seems like Citrix is repeating what they did with old products: first make (or buy) a bunch of products and then come with a product that merges all in one (aka XD7).

Having a limit of 50 concurrent print jobs sounds as “plenty” but in an enterprise environment this could be a problem, making it not enterprise ready IMO.
Withouth native built-in high availability / load balancing this creates a SPOF, a potential risk at least.

I wonder how the roadmap of the UPS looks like, is it seen as a nice-to-have addition (to compete with for instance ThinPrint / triCerat) or a core function like the universal printer driver? Is Citrix planning this as stand-alone product (stepping in the software-defined-printing market)?

I’m sure a Citrix product manager can enlighten us with some insights 😉

Cheers
Ingmar