[ Date Index ] [ Thread Index ] [ <= Previous by date / thread ] [ Next by date / thread => ]
Simon Waters wrote: > Kevin Tunison wrote: > >> Older than that, minus the GUI bit. I worked in a company that >> utilized a UNIX server with WYSE (dumb) terminals. These badboys were >> Apple II E style, yet cost hundreds of pounds to replace the >> old-school hardware. It takes a lot of noise for people to realize >> thin computing doesn't have to cost that much anymore. >> > > Although it is worth bearing in mind that thin computing solutions are > rarely a huge money saver on hardware (except where like Tom you deploy > on old PCs as the thin client). > > Where I've seen such things deployed, it is rare the thin client is > hugely cheaper than a thicker client. The saving is usually to be had in > system administration effort, reliability etc. In that it is easy to > upgrade the server side, install software, provide proper backup and > replacement for every settings, and every byte of user data. > > For big organisations, where they get a better price on thin client > hardware this is probably somewhat different, but unless they start > shipping thin clients in huge volumes it is unlikely that small buyers > will get huge discounts on the hardware. > > Also I think some of the Windows thin client solutions put people off. > Microsoft Windows was never designed as a multiuser OS, and MS Windows > thin client solutions generally result in administering N badly hacked > virtual Windows boxes with mediocre performance, and limited advantages > over running Windows locally. As such the big benefits (less system > admin effort, easier upgrades) disappear very quickly. > > Where as Unix and Unix like OSes were designed as multiuser OSes, and so > don't have to "hack" stuff to make it work in this environment. You also > get a much bigger incremental benefit server side when running multiple > copies of the same software, as the whole shared library architecture > was designed and built for just this scenario. > Funny you should mention that. At the last place I was working they had about 10 Xeon servers in a Windows 2003 Cluster running terminal services. It seemed that if one server had a glitch and BSOD it would slowly take the rest of the servers down. They also needed regular reboots for Windows updates. IIRC the thin clients were being bought at about £300 each plus monitor. Rob -- The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG http://mailman.dclug.org.uk/listinfo/list FAQ: http://www.dcglug.org.uk/linux_adm/list-faq.html