Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Lenovo to Sell Blade Desktops

Posted by timothy on from the the-thin-client-is-back-again-and-again dept.

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."

9 of 160 comments (clear)

  1. Thin Client Redux by TripMaster+Monkey · · Score: 4, Informative


    Here's a link containing some more detailed information about ClearCube's technology.

    So...thin clients are back in vogue yet again...let's see if they stick this time. With the Blade Desktop's modular architecture and ability to run the KVM over standard, existing LAN infrastructure, this iteration might have a shot.

    --
    ____

    ~ |rip/\/\aster /\/\onkey

    1. Re:Thin Client Redux by Jeff+DeMaagd · · Score: 4, Insightful

      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.

    2. Re:Thin Client Redux by jbolden · · Score: 4, Informative

      1) They refresh from the server so if something goes wrong you can simply push the off button and turn them on again

      2) No HD and no fan means no moving parts (except keyboard and mouse) and thus very few hardware failures (except keyboard and mouse)

      3) Your end users don't have physical access to machines with data on them. This is a huge plus for security.

  2. What? by shobadobs · · Score: 4, Funny

    Is this summary serious? Wouldn't they want output devices, too?

  3. Reasons why phbs will love this ... by tomhudson · · Score: 4, Funny
    [ ] "reduces desk clutter" - so they can now make your cubby smaller, since you no longer need a desk - a tea wagon should suffice
    [ ] they can now appropriate your amd64-3000 for themselves, since you don't need such a powerful unit any more
    [ ] "a clean desk is a sign of a sick mind" - and this will reduce desk clutter ... so you can be fired because you're now obviously a sicko perv
    [ ] central management - "all your pr0n are belong to us"
    ... I for one don't welcome our asian blade-serving overlords.
  4. NOT a thin client by A+nonymous+Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    Thin clients keep all their info on the server. This is NOT a thin client. It might be called a remote client, but each blade has its own CPU, disk drives, etc. Each blade is a full PC, serving just one desktop. The only thing unusual is that the PC is located in the server room instead of on the desktop. Thin clients are really just a minor variation on the old timeshare model of big expensive computers. This could only be considered a thin client if you think of every user having their very own dedicated server.

    Thin clients vs PCs are like taxis vs private cars. Blade PCs are like private cars kept in a communal garage, like an apartment block vs a private house.

    You didn't even read your own link. This is a new low for slashdot, methinks.

    --
    Infuriate left and right
  5. The right tool for the job by kebes · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.

  6. Re:In my day... by propellor_head · · Score: 4, Funny
    Because you don't have to dick around with them to make them work?

    ... or because they ran Eunuchs?

  7. NOT a thin term by Predius · · Score: 5, Informative

    For those too lazy to RTFA...

    These are not thin terms. It's a bunch of full function blade servers, on a managed KVM backplane. You then have remote 'end nodes' that supply DVI/USB/sound over Cat5, Fiber, or IP, your choice.

    So far, this is pretty ho-hum, boring. The neat trick is the software that comes with it. Take an 8 blade chassis, setup 7 users on it, each with their own PC. Blade 8 is now your hot spare. Uh oh, Joe just had a failure? Fire up the management app from your desk, swap him to blade 8. Without getting up, Joe now has a new system, and you can deal with the failed blade on your time, either remotely via your end node, or in the server room.

    No, it's not a huge advancement, but for places that maintain large fleets of desktops that run near identical OS/software installs, it makes system management and maint a bit easier by reducing time lost to running around shuffling hardware.