Slashdot Mirror
HP Introduces Transmeta Thin Clients
prostoalex writes "HP will announce the T5500 and T5300 thin clients on Monday at the TechEX show in New York City, which use the 733-MHz and 533-MHz versions of Transmeta's TM5800 CPU. Prices range from $599 to $629."
Wait, I can buy a regular PC for less... what gives?
733 MHz, and I'm supposed to celebrate?
Transmeta missed the boat. Even in thin clients, they're underpowered. At 733 MHz, even low IPC won't help.
Transmeta was a good company, but they didn't get their product to market in time.
--
Use Vobbo for Video Blogs
When I can go buy a cheap $129 Via C3 motherboard with integrated everything, slimline case, memory, keyboard, mouse and flat panel for $500, why should I consider buying this thin client? Once you get away from the standard PC mentality, the costs do become increasingly important...
Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
Its always great to see an underdog/specialty chip maker gain some market share, even if its in the mostly-corporate-lan-dominated arena of Thin-Clients.
At least Sun Micro's "Sun Ray" system will get some much needed competition out of this.
We use Sun Ray's here at work, and while they do thier job pretty admirably, they do have some quirky lock-up issues we haven't been able to resolve.
/* * pope1 */
Larry Ellison has tried to sell thin clients and failed. TWICE. Why does Carly think this will work?
1: Take a failed business model.
2: ???
3: Profit
Hence the fact that it's a thin client. In other words, virtually none of the processing (apart from some basic drawing to the screen functions) is done locally. It's all done on some big server the user never has to see.
When I was setting up my LTSP-style arrangement at home, I shopped around a bit for clients. I already had an old Javastation Krups, but found it much to slow for heavy use.
These thin clients are $599 to about $629, similar to the prices I found but I can't understand why companies make them so expensive. I decided to build my own using VIA mini-ITX boards for less than $300.
It amazes me when companies fail to analyze why previous thin client computing initiatives haven't caught on, and put out thin clients that cost the same as a full desktop PC. My local bank (Barclay's) have replaced old X Terminals with Dell desktop PCs (P4s!) running Exceed, and I assume they chose this based on price.
- Brian
I am by no means an industry analyst, but here's my observations.
We started off here at work with a System 36 and dumb terminals at everyone's desk. Everyone got their work done, and aside from hardware problems, there was no need to get up and walk to somone's desk. If anyone had problems, it was all centralized. All my work was done from my desk.
We then moved off dumb terminals and replaced everything with PCs. Trips to people's desk are frequent (probably 20 a day) and the rest of the time is spent building replacement PCs. Users store their own data, and if their drive crashes without a backup, they're SOL. How do you get a user to backup their data on a regular basis? Got me.
Now we start looking at server based solutions like Citrix and $300 Wyse terminals on the desk. Hmm.. minimized trips to the desk, all management centralized, hey, didn't we used to have that?
It looks to me like we have a trend. We got off the diskless/helpless workstations in favor of robust, useful boxes. Now we're heading back that helpless box stage and centralize our configuration, installation, and data. I predict that diskless will always be, and in fact will be favorable in reduced admin costs. because of that I welcome a market that is competitive at the thin client level.
There is no reasonable defense against an idiot with an agenda
:wq
We run mini-itx booting from compact flash...total cost 250 and boots in 10 seconds...
Check out peewee linux....
Got Code?
Of course as others have pointed out, there is no pricing info; but let's assume for a minute that the things are priced the same or more than a regular PC.
Why buy one?
Because these things aren't aimed at J. Random Linux Hacker, or even Joe Blow Windows user. They're aimed at corporations who want to keep people locked down. Just try keeping a PC made from standard parts totally locked down. I've even seen standard PCs kludged with locks and keys, which people just ended up jimmying open so they could install a video card they could use to play games when the boss wasn't looking!
With just a stupid thin client on your desk, you have to stay focused on the budget spreadsheet, or the timeline for ordering new timeline forms, or TPS reports, or whatever it is that's infinitely more boring than what a standard PC can offer.
In other words, it's more likely to be secure by design right from the start.
Also, there are fewer players in this space. Basic economics tells us that when there is less competition, prices remain high.
Just to disclose, I do have some stock in Transmeta, and it's doing really well today.
Would I buy such a device? Of course not. I have no need for it. I'm not a corporation that loses $50/employee/day in lost productivity due to PC maintenance and games.
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
then you get to install all the software($), set up a back-up program for each individule PC($$), and when the user screws up a setting, send somone to the desk to fix it($$$), then when a virus hits, you have to be sure their updated($), and each machine will have to be indivule scanned($$$$).
get the picture?
Now I would use one for the home, but for a lot of business, this is the way to go.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Well, you can get a Thin Client for as little as $200-$400. I just bought several for one of my clients at about $650 a pop, but that was because I wanted them to be capable of Windows emulation and X Windows.
The real savings is in support costs, though. With regualar PC's and hard drives, the initial costs to setup and secure the workstation are much higher, and even then the users are always screwing things up with Bonzia Buddy, assorted screensavers, etc. Using thin clients with Linux or Terminal Server really cuts down on support costs.
Anyway, the statement in that article which I found odd was that HP was the leader in the Thin Client market. Everytime I have to set clients up with more TC's, I research the market again, and Wyse is always the best deal. Frankly, I thought they were in the lead for the thin client market, though I may be wrong.
I can rattle off a list about ways of going about it. The question is, how the hell do I backup 500 PCs in an efficient manner on a regular basis? I agree that there are some cool techniques (including the one you mentioned) but getting a setup that works well would take far more time than our current method. Not to mention that doesn't solve the original problem, user issues and hardware upgrade.
Oh, and I should also mention that something like telling users to save their data on the server makes sense, but there are folks above me that have fundamental issues with this.
There is no reasonable defense against an idiot with an agenda
:wq
but at ~$600 there really isn't a compelling reason to consider them instead of a regular desktop...
I'm seeing alot of posts stating "I can buy a PC for two hundred bucks cheaper..." etc. There is a HUGE advantage and cost savings when using thin clients. First and foremost, the initial cost of implementing thin clients on hardware vs. hardware comparison is more expensive, this is a given. When you look into IT cost associated w/ the maintenence/implementation it is MUCH MUCH cheaper and easier to manage. The company I work for is top reseller of IGEL based thin clients in North America (http://www.igel.de) Infact most of our business originates from Thin Client sales. Here is a common scenario: Company ABC looks at PCs because of the cheaper cost. Company XYZ looks at thin clients. Company ABC pays for a PC, OS License, and deployment costs. For a large corporate rollout, lets say 1600 workstations (across the country) this takes approximately 18 months. Then six months afterwards you need to start all over, updating/reimaging, and updating the hardware. Hard drives go bad, users screw up their system etc. Company XYZ on the other hand, has us ship the units directly to the location, they plug it in, connect over the internet to the "management server" where the client is configured in less that 5 minutes by tech support, rebooted and its done... no IT personel are used for installation, and when it comes ot upgrading an image, or setting it back to defaults... how about the ability to do 10000+ machines within 10 minutes at the same time, REMOTELY? Sounds like thin clients kick some PC ass, huh?
It's kinda like "client/server", then "decentralized" then "client/server" then "decentralized" then "client/server" etc..
History is good at repeating transitions between different computing paradigms and back..
Software should be free as in speech, but if we also get some free beer, all the better.
In an environment which locks down the desktops to keep the users from installing additional software, Bonzai buddies, and all that other drek, your support costs are not substantially different between cheap PCs and thin clients.
The problems show up when you have to deal with users demanding access they don't need. With a thin client, you tell them it can't be done and they believe you. With a cheap PC, they know it can be done and some PHB always forces you to make an exception for that one user. And another. And another.
If system/network admins were allowed to make the final security decision, half of the problems would be gone before the users could finish typing the email requesting special access.
I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.