Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
> ____/ Mark Kent on Tuesday 29 April 2008 15:45 : \____
>
>> JEDIDIAH <jedi@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
>>> On 2008-04-25, Mark Kent <mark.kent@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>> Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
>>>>> Thin-Clients Revisited
>>>>>
>>>>> ,----[ Quote ]
>>>>>| The death of the PC is predicted once again. Of course I will be wrong
>>>>>| like all the others before me. Personal Computing is so seductive that it
>>>>>| will morph into ultra-cheap low-powered devices that hybridise the web
>>>>>| thin-client with the personal device. Even Dell are aiming to release a
>>>>>| sub $100 Linux (Ubuntu?) notebook. What I can say, however, is that the
>>>>>| day of the big beige/black box is stone dead maybe it will take a major
>>>>>| operating system vendor with it.
>>>>> `----
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.siriusit.co.uk/myblog/thin-clients-revisited.html
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I agree entirely... the desktop is very very dead, long live the
>>>> appliance and the mobile device.
>>>
>>> 4 of the 5 desktop machines in this house are used as appliances.
>>>
>>
>> This is becoming pretty-much a norm, now. The "desktop" PC thing was
>> built on the idea that one machine could do everything. This was based
>> on the 1970s viewpoint that the computer was an uncommitted tool which
>> only required software in order to "purpose" the tool. A fine thought,
>> in many respects, but I suspect most people didn't really consider just
>> how many uses people would put a PC to. Microsoft shot themselves in
>> both feet by failing maintain an operating system and software which
>> would easily and seemlessly run an arbitrary combination of peripherals
>> in a reliable fashion. Once a point had been reached where most people
>> regarded installing software as "dangerous" the web as "risky" for
>> surfing, that some sites should be avoided, that some combinations of
>> software just didn't work, and that the whole thing had to be rebuilt
>> anyway every few months, it was game over.
>>
>> By leaving behind millions of machines unable to run the "latest
>> software", but perfectly capable of doing the tasks most people actually
>> need, given the right operating system and applications; Linux was
>> perfectly timed to exploit the huge available pool of older machines,
>> and created, in the process, the "appliance" usage of IBM PCs. A whole
>> generation of print servers, web servers, gaming servers and more have
>> graced offices and the houses of the technically aware for some time.
>> Appliances are not remotely new, rather, it's that the mainstream is
>> discovering the joys of "repurposed" hardware.
>
> Just watch what IBM does with the mainframes it does not bury. It puts Linux on
> them.
>
We need to look much harder at recycling and reuse.
--
| mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
| Cola faq: http://www.faqs.org/faqs/linux/advocacy/faq-and-primer/ |
| Cola trolls: http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/ |
| Open platforms prevent vendor lock-in. Own your Own services! |
|
|
