'Dumb Terminals' Can Be a Smart Move for Companies

Carl Bialik from WSJ writes "More companies are forgoing desktop and laptop computers for dumb terminals — reversing a trend toward powerful individual machines that has been in motion for two decades, the Wall Street Journal reports. 'Because the terminals have no moving parts such as fans or hard drives that can break, the machines typically require less maintenance and last longer than PCs. Mark Margevicius, an analyst at research firm Gartner Inc., estimates companies can save 10% to 40% in computer-management costs when switching to terminals from desktops. In addition, the basic terminals appear to offer improved security. Because the systems are designed to keep data on a server, sensitive information isn't lost if a terminal gets lost, stolen or damaged. And if security programs or other applications need to be updated, the new software is installed on only the central servers, rather than on all the individual PCs scattered throughout a network.'"

Comments

Dumb terminals....

[lofoforabr]

...for dumb users! Doesn't it seem right?

Re:Dumb terminals....

[maxume]

Do you think they also have asshole servers for asshole sys admins?

Thin Clients! The Future of Computing Since 1994!

[Nova Express]

I look forward to the 2017 Slashdot article proclaiming how thin clients are the wave of the future as well, right next to the stories about how practical fusion and "real" artificial intelligence are just around the corner...

SWEET!

[cepler]

...now where'd I put my DEC VT102? *Scurries off to the attic* Time to eBay it! :)

ad campaign

[Anonymous Coward]

I can envision the ad campaign now: "Dumb Terminals for Dumb Users"

Re:Not good for large installations.

[pipatron]

One biggy is that with MS Terminal server there is no saving on licensing (i.e just because you are running terminal server doesn't automatically mean that you could move to a concurrent licensing model) Plus to make it work really well you need to invest in third party products to suppliment Microsoft Terminal server.

You could also move to an operating system built from the ground with this kind of usage in mind, for example Linux. Then you can stop worry about licensing too.

Re:GE did this to avoid rewiring office building

[Anonymous Coward]

GE has a wonderful ip range. 3.0.0.0/8
Now, i believe that's more than China has ;)

they can also have a computer named 3.13.3.7 which is awesome ;)

Re:You're too early!

[ebvwfbw]

I guess we'd better decide quickly then: we've tried "Dumb terminal", then "Thin client", so what do we call them this time?

How about "Dumb client" or "Thin terminal". Oh wait, "Dumb Client" is already taken. The people that use SCO.

Re:Not good for large installations.

[ErroneousBee]

I like to go for 100% myself.

I like to vary the loop amongst APF authorised tasks, a TSO user, CICS regions, batch, and occasionally a non-swappable system task.

Its been some years since I've taken down a running mainframe, though.

Re:data is not lost when a dumb term is stolen

[3.5 stripes]

He gets about two feet before his back gives out?

Re:GE did this to avoid rewiring office building

[moosesocks]

Does anyone else find it ironic that a company named General Electric has inadequate AC wiring in their headquarters?

What next?

[julesh]

What's next? Minicomputers?