localapps

[Peter Scheie]

Managing a bunch of fat clients is a lot more work than a bunch of thin 
clients.  I think a more accurate statement, as I was once told, would 
be "Apps run where they should run."

rmcdaniel at indata.us wrote:
> "Localapps is the future"
>
> If that is the case, why not just use fat clients (comptuers)?  I am a
> huge advocate of centralized computing, especially in a school
> environment...
>
>
> Ron
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Re: localapps
> From: "Odin_Nøsen" <odin at gnuskole.no>
> Date: Fri, November 07, 2008 2:46 pm
> To: Development discussion of K12Linux <k12linux-devel-list at redhat.com>
>
>   
>> launch firefox it will be faster. I tested this and found you need a
>> min. of 512MB on the client to have firefox cached. I did not see any
>> increase in launching firefox a second time with only 256MB.
>>     
>
> In my experience 256MB is just enough to make firefox run without
> swaping, but it's
> running fine (5 sec startup on 900mhz klients).
>
> I must agree about K12Linux been "slower" than K12LTSP 5.2EL. We could
> run 40 thin
> clients on 4GB RAM with K12LTSP, but with K12Linux you should run more
> than 25 thin
> clients on 8GB RAM. RAM is cheap, so the only problem is old cheap
> servers that doesn't
> support more than 4GB RAM. Flash also seems to demand more, but I think
> that is linked
> to flash movies and 25 pupils watching flash movies as the same time :-)
> Localapps is
> the future!
>
>
> Odin
>
> _______________________________________________
> K12Linux-devel-list mailing list
> K12Linux-devel-list at redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12linux-devel-list
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> K12Linux-devel-list mailing list
> K12Linux-devel-list at redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12linux-devel-list
>