localapps

[Peter Scheie]

I think the idea with local apps is that you'll set a flag in lts.conf 
for those clients that can support them, and then it shows up as a 
submenu, under the Applications menu, called Local Applications.  If a 
given client doesn't have the horsepower, then the submenu won't be 
there (because you've disabled in lts.conf).

Peter

Luis Montes wrote:
> I see that too. I just wish that I had more RAM on the 40 or so t150s 
> I got from disklessworkstations a couple of years ago.
> They have 128 but I think they max out at 256. If I can get them to 
> all to 512 it would be well worth it, I think.
>
> The next problem will be to specify icons to launch local apps only on 
> specific machines. I have about 30 newer thin clients with 800Mhz VIAs 
> and 512M ram that I'd like to use localapps, but just those machines 
> specifically for now.
>
> Luis
>
>
> rmcdaniel at indata.us wrote:
>> "Apps run where they should run."
>>
>>
>> I can see the logic in that statement.
>>
>> Thanks for the replies.
>>
>> Ron
>>
>> -------- Original Message --------
>> Subject: Re: localapps
>> From: Peter Scheie <peter at scheie.homedns.org>
>> Date: Fri, November 07, 2008 3:56 pm
>> To: Development discussion of K12Linux <k12linux-devel-list at redhat.com>
>>
>> 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
>>>
>>>     
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>>   
>
> _______________________________________________
> K12Linux-devel-list mailing list
> K12Linux-devel-list at redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12linux-devel-list