<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 TRANSITIONAL//EN"> <HTML> <HEAD> <META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; CHARSET=UTF-8"> <META NAME="GENERATOR" CONTENT="GtkHTML/3.3.2"> </HEAD> <BODY> On Fri, 2005-10-14 at 13:06 -0700, Bill Kendrick wrote: <BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE> <PRE> So, again, apps like Tux Typing 2 should provide some less graphics-intensive options for people stuck with lower-end networks (10Mbps and 100Mbps) in their thin client setups. Just my opinion, of course. I have no real-world experience with K12LTSP. :^/ </PRE> </BLOCKQUOTE> Gig-E NICs, especially copper ones, are actually quite inexpensive these days. And while a decent 48-port switch w/ Gig-E uplinks is going to cost at least US$1K, remember that the cost savings inherent in implementing LTSP/K12LTSP far outweigh the costs of the switch or Gig-E NIC. That's true even if you go hog-wild and use that pricey Cisco gear (Catalyst 2950-48's are currently just under $2,700, Amer.com's equivalent is $999.98). I happen to do my servers with fiber Gig-E, and even with that, the cost savings are what, 1/5th or less of what a 20-station Windows lab of any sort would cost? If you go to 40 terminals, it's closer to 1/10th. So, for those who are in a "lower-end" network situation, remember what it would cost you to do it the *other* way (i. e. Windows). Anybody contemplating a lab of 20 clients by definition has that kind of money, else they wouldn't be contemplating it. :-) Therefore, LTSP, with a decent server and Gig-E switch, is a bargain, and Matt's folks would actually *save* money by getting a proper switched environment for LTSP. The alternative is close to $1,000 per Windows PC. Even at $500 per Windows PC, LTSP + decent switched network is a big, fat bargain. Matt, pick up a couple of Gig-E switches, one for each classroom, link them via Gig-E, and put your server on Gig-E as well. You will be much, much happier, and the business case is there. --TP </BODY> </HTML>