Subject: Re: [K12OSN] Future LTSP direction: Local Apps
pogson
robert.pogson at gmail.com
Fri Mar 23 20:53:18 UTC 2007
"The only down side is power consumption as compared to real thin
clients."
I think there are other downsides:
* capital cost per seat is almost $100 more than a fanless thin
client like NTAVO 6040
* there will be power supply and cpu fans wearing out and making
noise
* power consumption will likely be double or triple that of
compact thin client
* the network has to load 100 megabytes or so into each client at
the start of classes as compared to a thin client loading only a
few. Caching may help from a warm login but that means you have
to leave the things running, increasing the energy consumption
again.
Still it is a neat solution if you are going to do lots of multimedia or
heavy CPU load. I would only use it in a multimedia development lab. All
of my classroom and lab experiences with the curriculums I have do not
need it. I think most of the downsides would be mitigated with a
slightly more powerful processor and Multi-seat X. Then, the power is
averaged over 5-10 users.
One upside not listed is that the server becomes a straight file server
so it might be able to service more clients this way.
I still think straight LTSP is the best solution in most cases. I could
see one such client per classroom and possibly a bunch in a multimedia
lab.
Robert Pogson
--
A problem is an opportunity.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/k12osn/attachments/20070323/c3085c31/attachment.htm>
More information about the K12OSN
mailing list