Slashdot Mirror
Lenovo to Sell Blade Desktops
Some guy writes "Having acquired IBM's PC division, Lenovo will become the first major reseller of blade desktops. Blade desktops feature only input devices and a 'networking unit,' connecting to a blade server for computational power. Such thin client designs reduce support needs and cluttered desk space, but require complex deployments to work well."
IMHO the problem is that the "thin" client must have almost all the resources of a normal pc... processor, memory, video card, nic, screen, mouse, keyboard, usb ports, everything except perhaps a hard drive. So what's the point?
On the surface, it looks like a thin client, but I think the difference is that each user would still get their own dedicated computer, so really, it's just a long distance KVM.
Sun Ray == true thin client. It connects to a server running apps.
This == glorified one port KVM. Basically, it uses a blade server as a desktop PC. It extends the keyboard, mouse, and VGA to the desk from the server room.
I see lots of posts that are reminding us how thin clients are nothing new. Indeed having thin clients and centralized processing is nothing new... and sometimes it seems that the pendulum swings back and forth between "imagine how cool it would be if each user had this much power on their desktop" and "imagine how amazing it would be if all this computing power could be centralized and used efficiently."
I think the point to take out of all this is that we should use the right tool for the job. There are lots of good desktop PCs, and lots of good thin client solutions (or being worked on). For any given task, you have to decide what's right. What is easier to manage, a centralized server or a bunch of desktops? (depends on how many users you have, what software you're running, etc.) What's more powerful, having good desktop PCs or a central server? (depends on your software needs) What's more cost effective? (again... it depends!)
Obviously hard-core coders and video game designers are going to need their own dedicated machines for testing (and crashing!)... whereas alot of managers, secretaries, and data entry personal would do fine with thin clients.
Maybe this is totally obvious to slashdotters... but it's something that perhaps the higher-ups in companies should come to realize. There is no perfect solution... you have to crunch the numbers for any particular corporate environment.
So what's the point?
Well for one thing, the 'thin client' can have a single 'System on a Chip' instead of all the seperate ICs you're talking about... since it's all in a single piece of silicon, it can be pretty cheap/low power.
For another, rather than running say 300 computers at 10% utilization you could possibly get by with 60 blades averaging 50% load for 300 users. If you're a big company that has a lot of people doing very low cpu intensive stuff like data entry/etc, it can make a difference in TCO to run a thin client environemt Vs a full blown desktop for everyone.
And because it's really a cluster, people who need to have more processing power than a standard desktop can have it.
I predict that, once again, the thin clients will end up costing about as much as mid-spec PCs, leaving nothing left over to justify the cost of a big expensive server for the backroom.
You can accomplish practically the same thing by using PCs with a standardized configuration and putting home directories on a fileserver.
Having previously worked for ClearCube, I can tell you that these are not thin clients. Their patented technology allows the video signal from the video card (yes, they have video daughtercards, nVidia chipset) to be sent down CAT5 cable to an interface box. That is where the monitor is connected as well as keyboard/mouse/sound. They use USB to get all the peripheral signals back and forth. The blades themselves are anywhere from 2.8-3.2 GHz P4, (maybe faster since I left) and they're even selling dual-processor workstation units.
They also have a version of the blade that can drive a quad monitor display at 1600x1200 per display 24 bit color. The only limitation on the quad is that all the displays have to be the same resolution and bit-depth, since the video signals are interleaved down the cable. (This may have changed since I left)
ClearCube may also be in the business of selling thin clients as I saw some that were being looked at, but I don't know if they're selling them now. I don't believe the article is referring to the thin clients.
The blade systems they sell are solid PCs and they're actually on their 3rd generation of technology. The company has been around for more than 5 years, so this isn't something that just came on the market. They just aren't mainstream because the technology has a much higher up-front cost so most companies don't look at them unless they have a specific environment where these would work well.
What I am thinking is, use Skole Linux, buy cheap network cards, and run three thin clients off the fast recent machine. Is this not a case where without spending hardly any more money the institution gets a lot more functionality out of what it already has? And may there not be lots of public sector/charity cases where this sort of thing applies? Or is there something about thin clients or Skole Linux that I don't know?
I've used several over the years. For ordinary desk work I will usually take one preferentially over a PC. Why?
- They are much smaller. The ones I have worked with are either flat "pizzabox styles" about 1" tall and the same footprint as the monitor that they sit under or micro towers a bit bigger than a CD drive.
- They are quiet. They are normally either fanless or have one small fan.
- They are maintenance free. The hardware has no moving parts and the software comes from a server.