First you had the usb LCD now you have a pc in a plug
http://www.jadeintegration.com/jackpc.php
Weve had these demod in the uni for a few months now. They are a no frill thin client. They do their job for the public clusters but tbh I aint impressed with the things. For what they are, they are a tad bit over priced but they are good with the right application :)
If you want, I will see if I can dig out the video this place took when they were testing these things.
aye, will take a while until they up the specs enough to run any sort of game
at the moment the x86 chip speed is clocked at 1.2ghz
:/
They are basically machines that would suite the likes of an internet cafe that doesnt require anything that has high spec graphics/interfaces and audio.
As said maybe these things will be upped in the spec in order to fulfil greater needs in future.
these would be perfect for our sales and project managers but whats the point - I can buy them a dekstop or laptop for that price nearly!!
Indeed, these along with the usb monitors are more for the office type environment and would save an amazing amount of space and cost
Seen these a while ago while looking for small media players for streaming music/films around the house.
Not much good for anything TBH. Even thin client/Citrix theyre going to be a dog to work with.
They seem pointless to me.
Perfect in a centralised environment. As it says, it runs a Citrix client, and it isnt intended ot do anything but that really. Might be a nice replacement for a Wyse terminal if you want somethign neater, and less likely get nicked.
3rd world uses as well
At that price?!
Quote from: funkychicken9000At that price?!
Not now of course but can see the practicality of it
Back in the day there were no power sockets and devices were plugged into the light sockets
This going backwards going forwards does have uses although this is pants for price at the moment.
The routers in the socket that are starting to ship are cool, networks using them, as well as other devices.
thin clients work really well in some environments, but these are too expensive - I dont think many companies would go with them over say the hp ones.
Quote from: sdpthin clients work really well in some environments, but these are too expensive - I dont think many companies would go with them over say the hp ones.
The only places I have seen thin client work well is for a dedicated task like stock control, etc. - try & run a whole load of different apps & it grinds to halt.
Badly set up & run then - one of the sites I look after has a 60 server farm, with 1025 users spread across several different contracts, each with a number of apps. They all work off old PCs that have been recycled and flashed with thinstation - the only linux distro Id have about the place. I know of another site with 24 citrix servers and 600 users (Not concurrent, although they do have that many licenses) with no problems.
The problem with most sites is that they allow too many users on each server in the farm (Citrix recommend 30 on very modern hardware, Id say 20-22 is better on the likes of mid range DL380 G5 equiv), AND they are lazily managed - for example - if something is up with one of the boxes rather than tackle the issue they will take it out of the farm for that published application. Net result - one less server, more load.
Number of issues since I moved them to citrix? very few, and mostly tsprofile problems. Issues beforehand - daily. The tech team there has been able to scale down from 15 to 5.
Thinclients are the way to go for large scale rollouts - so much more managable. The comment about third world cost is valid - the cost of a citrix license and a CAL comes to around about the price of a bog standard desktop PC, so you have that to add on top of the hardware cost. It is really only a suitable solution for a large organisation. the access gateway product however is another story - its amazingly cheap when compared to the likes of the AEP Netilla.
Im currently looking into the open source alternative to citrix - its a lot cheaper, but the reliability has been questionable. that can wait until I have the current project finished off at the royal hospital.
Quote from: MarkThe problem with most sites is that they allow too many users on each server in the farm (Citrix recommend 30 on very modern hardware, Id say 20-22 is better on the likes of mid range DL380 G5 equiv), AND they are lazily managed - for example - if something is up with one of the boxes rather than tackle the issue they will take it out of the farm for that published application. Net result - one less server, more load.
You ever worked at my place? One of our customers did that, to the tune of now being 3 servers, and the authentication server is about to die a horrible death.
I see it all too often :)
Quote from: MarkI see it all too often :)
*chuckle*
I was told the other day to "Sort it Out" by the "Service Delivery Manager". She also demanded a Plan Of Action by the end of the day, like ive nothing else to do. I suppose I _could_ have done, but your systems are knackered, they are creaking at the seams. The 2k boxen arent service packed up, and the NT4 servers just need skipping wouldnt have gone down all that well.
Why do companies refuse to spend money on their IT infrastucture, then complain when it doesnt work? They dont skimp on the Blackberrys, or their company cars and wage packets.
Quote from: BeakerQuote from: MarkI see it all too often :)
*chuckle*
I was told the other day to "Sort it Out" by the "Service Delivery Manager". She also demanded a Plan Of Action by the end of the day, like ive nothing else to do. I suppose I _could_ have done, but your systems are knackered, they are creaking at the seams. The 2k boxen arent service packed up, and the NT4 servers just need skipping wouldnt have gone down all that well.
Why do companies refuse to spend money on their IT infrastucture, then complain when it doesnt work? They dont skimp on the Blackberrys, or their company cars and wage packets.
All to common, hire one tech guy for 50 computers and people etc seems to be a common act
Quote from: neXusAll to common, hire one tech guy for 50 computers and people etc seems to be a common act
thats cool, but the sheer volume of problems that come through to us should have sent warning lights flashing. I chatted to my boss, and to one of our senior engineers. We are reinstating some servers by the sound of things, likely the ones that were still in the farm when we took over, but werent switched the f*** on.
Basically the company thought they could do their own support by taking it off the 3rd party (us), turns out they couldnt manage it because they lack the required level of skill and experience. Between the little desk i work on we have ~50 years combined experience. Plus, the next time she rings me up demanding something is done, now, without reference to my boss shes going to get the silent treatment. Its maddening, and if ive nothing to say im not going to say anything.
Quote from: neXusQuote from: BeakerQuote from: MarkI see it all too often :)
*chuckle*
I was told the other day to "Sort it Out" by the "Service Delivery Manager". She also demanded a Plan Of Action by the end of the day, like ive nothing else to do. I suppose I _could_ have done, but your systems are knackered, they are creaking at the seams. The 2k boxen arent service packed up, and the NT4 servers just need skipping wouldnt have gone down all that well.
Why do companies refuse to spend money on their IT infrastucture, then complain when it doesnt work? They dont skimp on the Blackberrys, or their company cars and wage packets.
All to common, hire one tech guy for 50 computers and people etc seems to be a common act
A more common model is 250 seats to 1 Tech support engineer, 3 sites to 1 tech support engineer, 3 tech support to one 2nd line.
I am in the process of moving a 16,500 user org from exchange 2003 to exchange 2007 for the sole purpose of making push email more accessible to those with smartphones.
I had a nice solution in place with a bluecoat SG as a reverse proxy on the DMZ serving up the owa. MS got involved and now I have 3 ISA servers, A cluster of CAS servers, A cluster of Mailbox servers, several hub servers and edge servers, and more holes punched through the double skinned firewall (PIX and CP NGX R65 on nokia) than is advisable from a security POV. And a netscaler thrown in for good measure.
Oh, and ISA 2006 enterprise is pish.
Quote from: MarkA more common model is 250 seats to 1 Tech support engineer, 3 sites to 1 tech support engineer, 3 tech support to one 2nd line.
That would be a dream, at that level we would actually be able to get some real fixes in place, rather than the Kludges we are implementing at the moment. One site (now mercifully gone last week) has some Proliant 400s, I for one wasnt sorry to see the back of those.