Slashdot Mirror
Sun introduces the "Sun Ray"
Doofuswrote to us about Sun's release of their newest effort to knock the PC off the corporate desktop.
The Sun Ray is essentially "a juiced-up monitor", and is a thin-client solution. Cost is 10$ per month for 5 years, or 30$ per month for a more powerful client. Not much technical details in the article, but we'll update with more links as these appear.Update: 09/08 01:15 by H :Thanks to Paul Tomblin for a huge PDF file with the tech specs.
The problem is that Sun's ideas make ALOT more sense than Micros~1's. PC networks are an anarchic mess to deal with; the idea is wrongheaded from top to bottom and I really don't think there is anything defensible about it other than "everyone else does it". We have better technologies now; the pc network is obsolete.
The reason PC's are so "successful" in the corporate market place is that there is a need for homogeneity (people need to communicate) - the corporate infrastructure selling mainframes wasn't interested. PC's were that path of least resistance - if everyone uses Micros~1 everyone can communicate. Well, Micros~1 has been abusing this power in a hideous fashion, and people are just tired of it.
support gun control: take guns from cops
It's really funny that after years of arguing the rising power of personal computers signals the death of mainframes, I'm now on the other side.
Since the early 1980's, the processor power of PCs has increased by a factor of almost 4000 and the strorage space by about the same amount. Where are the extra CPU cycles going? According to my NT task manager, 97% goes to the idle process! In a large organization, where does all the storage space go? Simple, hundreds of identical copies of the same applications such as Microsoft Office.
To understand why centralized computing resources like the SunRay have a chance, you must understand Total Cost of Ownership. In an enterprise environment, the cost of a network of computers is a combination of the price of the machines and software and the price of maintenence including factors such as software & hardware updates, periodic backups, and network administration. The upfront costs are dwarfed by the ongoing costs of support. The SunRay is directly targeted at reducing these costs.
My views of this topic have changed primarily because of the rapid bandwidth growth and improved stability of corporate networks. As 100kb/s and, in some cases, 1Gb/s connections proliferate, the differences between running an application locally and across the network diminish. But to the administrators, backing up 3 large machines is far easier than several hundred small ones.
Given one hour to live, the student replied: "I'd spend it with professor FP who can make an hour seem like a lifetime."
I think we see that the majority of commercial applications are moving away from the client server relationship to an ultra-thin client design (e.g. read web-enables). The $10 a month is a leasing price. The lease price on this machines is actually quite inexpensive. One needs to factor the tax-advantages that leasing provides (e.g. computer expenditures are automatically deducted at the current year). This is a looparound current tax laws. Desktop support is quite expensive. It requires the stocking of spare parts (hard-drives, monitors, blah, blah). I expect that this the interface for such a network will be open-standard, open-architecture. This would enable pushing applications back to server (where they belong, in my estimates) Anonymous Coward (thank you very much)
But I'm not sure it will be a single ivory tower company that does it.
NCs, thin clients, etc. are obviously great for the enterprise environment. I worked at a place that replaced two unix boxes (and their ridiculous licensing/service contracts) with about 20(!) NT boxes -- and as you can imagine, it became a backup/restore nightmare, with one incident costing close to $100K to recover. But the new employee training is much quicker with the PC's.
They spend more now for MS than for Unix, since they need many more people running around reconfiguring PC's when the users (about 250) hose them up.
What I'd like to see is some type of "Open Source" design for a next generation case and Mobo. Say "ATX++". Think of an Indy, and take it from there. Anyone can make interchagable parts for it, easily set up to be a NC, Standalone desktop or Server, but small footprint and classy looking. An open design; I buy my case from SGI, my Sparc mobo (licensed by Sun) from Gigabyte, my "Phuc Yu" power supply from taiwan, and it runs linux.
Slobber, Drool.
of course, when your PC goes down so does all your work. The Corona can start off right where you left off.
If you had ever worked around a large plant, you would know better. If you were a coder, you would know better about C++ vs. Java. But your a troll. Have some attention, go away.
Really fast Im sure...there goes the 100mbps ethernet
games run over Corona just fine. In fact, I achieved a new high score on Minesweeper.
If it's so darn cheap to make, why are they charging a monthly usage fee? If you ask me, I'd rather just buy the darn thing outright then have to do pay 10 bucks a month for the privlige. After all the only upgrading I'll be doing is on the thin client server and not the unit. Good idea, bad pricing scheme if you ask me.
and of course, you backup your computer every night to keep your data safe right?
Actually, its not just straw man you've employed here. For example, mixing apples and oranges --
... static void public main(argv[], ... and so on ...
> 1) Java. Well, just print "hello" in Java:
>
> 2) Thin Clients.
I'm going to stop you right there. On one hand, I could simply say printf ("hello\n"); and be done with it. On the other hand, I could point out that Java is one of many indirect methods that can be used to interract with an X terminal. Even a clever one like this.
> Now someone has to configure all the security,
> even though there's only one user (who's only
> going the do a little test and then move on).
> I need to create user ids/home dirs/user groups.
Horrific, isn't it? Now imagine setting up a *PC*. There are scripts for creating users in UNIX. Get one set right, you've got them all set right.
Actually, Sun's got me sold on this. I'm going to order a handful of the boxes and pass them out to our database group. They'll eat them up, and I won't have to worry about what they're doing with their registry. Now that we've gone to a POP mail solution, I'm willing to bet a few PCs will disappear.
The off-topic nature of the rest of your message precludes me from responding.
Yeah, X-Terminal are great.
In our corporate environment we have 3 Terminal Servers with Citrix Metaframe installed on them. Damn things crash all the time. I wouldn't be surprised if the Sun terminals will support ICA, RDP as well as XDMCP protocols, or at least that these will be options when you purchase the equipment.
Does anyone know how these things boot up? Do they boot from ROM or from TFTP?
Another point, I can't think of anyone who bought Sun equipment to save money - £200 for a keyboard, ouch!!! (I am lead to believe that Sun resellers get considerable discounts, however)
That's not to say that this particular model will spell the death knell of Microsoft. It sounds like these are closed boxes with a lot of custom hardware (i.e., no upgrades unless you pay Sun big $$$), though I could be wrong. And, they are not cheap! $9.99/month doesn't sound like a lot, but it adds up to something like $600 over the long term. The boxes I was working with were in the $300 range, with the only custom part being the boot-ROM added into the network cards to get the systems to boot with no local disk drives.
Your Servant, B. Baggins
Everywhere I have worked, the user data is stored on the server and it's done for a reason. The server is much much more reliable than your workstation (Well...) and is backed up on a regular schedule.
Would you rather rely on a 2 year old IDE drive that came with the computer, or the redundant backed-up drives on the server.
Sun doesn't run office in their offices. They run StarOffice and Applix.
1.Nobody needs dumb terminals in today's
workplace environment. Real computers are
necessary, not slick looking terminals.
OK, why? That's an awfully general statement,
with absolutely nothing backing it up.
2.A five year commitment is too long a
technology commitment in today's marketplace.
Not when only barely functionality is on the
desktop. Do you constantly upgrade your monitor?
With thin clients, you upgrade the SERVER. So
long as the client has enough colors, high enough
resolution, and doesn't break, they'll last for
YEARS. The hundreds of PCs you upgrade every two
years for $1k apiece is that much money you sink
into the server. And ~$100000 will buy one hell
of a server.
3.This won't integrate very well with a
Windows-centric economy.
Well then, I guess we should all nuke our Unix
partitions and go to Windows then, if there's no
point in trying.
4.It doesn't just involve buying a thin client.
It also involves buying the server, the software,
the administrators to configure it all and the
technicians to train the masses
Umm... the cost savings from buying hundreds of
PCs buys you the server. You'd need to buy the
software ANYWAY, whether its hundreds of single
user licenses or one network group license. If
you don't hire an idiot, you only need ONE admin
for the server, and the whole POINT of these
devices is that you turn them on and go. A person
who needs training to use a monitor or telephone
shouldn't be allowed near either.
I think the problem is you're stilling thinking
small... just you, sitting at a PC. These devices
were made for groups of hundreds of people, a
level where one independent machine per person is
a nightmare... where you DO need dozens of techs
and administrators and constant upgrading.
--
Brandon Hume
hume -> BOFH.Halifax.NS.Ca, http://WWW.BOFH.Halifax.NS.Ca/
Brandon Hume
hume -> BOFH.Halifax.NS.Ca, http://WWW.BOFH.Halifax.NS.Ca/
Try Winframe over X over a 14.4 :-)
It launched... my 30 minute trial with the X software expired before anything more than a window was drawn.
``We believe (JavaStation) was basically the right approach, but used some of the wrong technology. We've learned that users don't want to just use Java,'' Loiacono said.
Well, for one thing this is attractive to corporate CFOs.
While it would appear to most people that you're paying more for these devices than something like an e-machine, if you factor in the time value of money these boxes turn out to be pretty cheap. After five years, you'd have shelled out $600 for this box. If you're comparing this to the cost of a $600 computer, consider that you can take the initial difference in cash outlay ($590), park it in a safe investment that yields about ten percent annually, and have almost a thousand dollars in the kitty and the end of five years. To be financially equivalent over that time frame, a PC would have to cost about $375. CFOs are good at this kind of calculation, I've even known an exceptional few who could carry out this kind of calculation in their head. It's even better, because if this device is still operational at, say, three years out, it will likely have _some_ utility, whereas the PC is guaranteed to be nearly useless. Naturally, you have to also include the costs of servers and network infrastructure, but this is more than offset by centralizing support costs in many environments.
My main beef is that the lease period is too long. Five years is an eternity in technology; if the lease were three years and the monthly fee a little higher, say 12 or 13 dollars, the financial decision would be similar but the long term technical uncertainties less.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
Uh huh. I could tell you how many accountants here that write excel spreadsheets all day have PIIIs on their desk. They're not all that complicated spreadsheets either.
Let's be realistic here, who really needs a PC on their desk:
Now, which will be more expensive in the long run? You have a $10/mo/person thin client, plus the $10k for a beefy server. Or you have the endless upgrades of $2k/person/year plus the $10k for a beefy server plus the cost of moving machines around, fixing broken hardware, etc.
So, Load Linux/X onto a cheap Celeron 450 PC and call it an X-terminal. Done. You've covered your cost and obsolescense complaints 100%. You have the same thing, without the Sun lock.
If you don't like paying $500 up front for a PC, then lease 'em in bulk. Now you don't have to worry about the cost of money, or 5 year plans.
Now, selectively load offload your server/net by putting a few apps/swap onto your nice new "X-terminals", and cut your cost even further.
Thin Clients are, fundamentally, a return to dumb clients, which I have always thought were appropriate in business settings. Dumb terminal, dumb user, blah blah blah
Four-digit slashdot ID. Recognize.
I disagree. Of course PC's aren't going away completely. Sun Rays *don't* do everything a real PC does. It wasn't designed too.
There'll be many people who need a real PC. Engineer's, Artists, others. But there'll be plenty of positions where a thin client suits the need exactly.
Answer these questions. How will the users demand more from their computing environments. And how is the mainframe/terminal paradigm by and far unflexible from a user's perspective? The following examples I think are excellent uses for the Sun Ray. People in these positions will find a simple device less intimidating and easier to work with then a "real" PC.
An executive who just uses a PC to read e-mail and Pointcast
Data entry people who use one application to inpput data
That was just a few out of the many users who will find a thin client be the most flexible, and empowering. There are many more area where the Sun Ray will provide the best answer.
-Brent--
I'm not sure whether this is the right strategy to take; it's been at least three years since the populace were luddist, technophobic, ignorant masses. Today, the internet is the thing to be on, and to get there you'll need a computer. And what does 'book-sized' mean?
Nobody needs dumb terminals in today's workplace environment. Real computers are necessary, not slick looking terminals.
The server IS the "real computer," and real software runs on it. Who cares if you're close enough to hear the fans going?
A five year commitment is too long a technology commitment in today's marketplace. Computer needs change on the order of months, not years.
This argument is actually FOR this product. When you use terminals, all you need to upgrade is the server! Put in a new UltraMegaPowerSparc, and the entire workplace is upgraded.
This won't integrate very well with a Windows-centric economy.
If you mean a Windows-centric workplace, then you're right. But a Windows-centric workplace probably won't even consider buying this product.
It doesn't just involve buying a thin client. It also involves buying the server, the software, the administrators to configure it all and the technicians to train the masses
It seems to me that there actually should be LESS training involved, since these terminals provide access only to applications. The user experience is simpler.
The artical implies that these devices are aimed at corporate customers, who will be attempting to reduce costs. This device is going to cost them $600 over five years which, although cheaper than a PC, is still a considerable investment. This does not have 50% of the functionality of a PC, yet costs more then half as much.
The other big problem I see is that coperates tend to like runnning their own custom software packages, and customising the standard ones. IS Sun going to allow these packages to be uploaded to its own execution servers (and provide the necessaryt security), or is it intending that corporates buy their own servers. If the latter is the case then the total cost is not going to be far short of a PC anyway.
excuse me? First, we're talking server farm, not mainframe- no single point of failure, hardware dedicated to specific tasks, etc.
with that out of the way, let's look at flexibility. With a client/server paradigm, I can be at any desk in the building and be at my desktop. This would be very, very, nice.
If bob's machine fails, you place a new NC on his desk, and bing, he's back where he was. Have you ever had your bosses hard drive fail spactacularly?
If I need to add another desk, it's another $10 bucks upfront, plug it in, give 'em a card, and forget about it. Try doing the same thing with a PC. The same thing goes in reverse- when somebody leaves, it's no big deal to put someone else there.
what workplace flexibility do you get from having a dedicated PC?
~mindlace
I think the basic idea behind thin clients should bring back the "good old days" of dumb terminals.
By good old days, I mean the days when you could walk up to any terminal in the office, log in, and everything would be exactly the same, because you are in your server account. The days when a sysadmin could install something once, and it took effect everywhere.
This should be done again with GUIs. The challenges are that graphics take more processing and bandwidth.
Someone needs to make a thin client that has all the computer parts except any kind of disk drive or other moving parts. It should boot off the network, and to run anything, copy the executable from the server into RAM. Any stored data it operates on should be written to and read from the server. All processing (except big jobs) and graphics rendering should be done on the client. That would both simplify things for the sysadmin and bring back the good old days. It would also operate very fast.
Vidi, Vici, Veni
I wish they would have gone into a little more detail about what it includes.
I'm assuming it's just a diskless client, and needs a big server to connect to. But then they mention running apps off the internet, so does it have a tiny OS in ROM, with a minimal browser?
Still, $10 a month is far cheaper than any PC you can get. If this takes off, maybe there will be lots of cheap, older Suns flooding the marketplace, Suns too old to support a these Javaclients. I know I could use a Sparc10 in my basement to keep my 486's company.
George
More importantly, can you Beowulf it?
I personally like the software and processing done at my desk. It's bad enough when the network goes down now or the internet get laggy, imagine with these things!! Now only e-mail and file sharing would be down, with these inexpensive (until you do the math) clients EVERYTHING would be down.
No way...
This thing would run Java code. Doe anyone have an idea of the performance of these native Java-things? Does anyone know where embedded Java is used in other apps ?
42 !
There are very distinct advantages to a system such as SunRay, and the "Hot Desk" portion is a key part of it.
Many users have gotten used to their PC's, and can't quite wrap their minds around this concept of not being able to break their machine. Increased productivity alone will pay for these units, and reduced support costs are money in the bank, not to mention the reduced drain on electricity and cooling resources.
Our particular environment has our developers using $4000 PC's and expensive X server software for NT to access a Unix box, to write code. This makes no sense. The beancounters and IT people agree. Especially since upgrading to a faster system only involves putting a bigger machine in the chilly room downstairs, not running all over the place migrating user data for weeks, whilst listening to the users complain all day long.
I called our Sun reseller first thing this morning to see about getting some eval units.
Additional bonus: it looks cool, and you can now get USB Sun keyboards. My PC at home can look for a Type 6 hanging off of it RSN.
I'm actually curious to see what the resource requirements are to support a bunch of these things deployed in a company. One box per 5 clients? 25 clients? 50 clients? Is the server end a web server, or is it custom software for Solaris, etc...
It will be interesting to see how Sun balances forcing people to buy servers (which they want to do) with integrating this technology with a business's existing servers.
there is nothing new under the SUN ;-)
I think you're right about this. "The size of a book" reminds me of those small black NCD xterm boxes. If these wind up being only $10/mo, you could plug them into a 15" monitor and you'll have a cheap terminal. You can also plug modems into the things... though I don't think anyone outside of sales would recommend it.
1. Most people use their PC for office-like applications and internet. A dumb terminal is more than enough for this. If (and it's just a guess) Sun's server for these "Sun-rays" is just one of their usual servers, and the "terminal" are just running some kind of minimal X, it's just like logging in a unix server from a remote unix work station.
2. A five year commitment is nothing! Training staff to use M$Word means you'll probably use M$Word for more than 5 years.
3. True, and that's the biggest problem for Sun
4. Big companies anyway have servers, technicians and administrators. They just want less of them and that's what Sun is offering to them. In my group, there is one sys admin for a dozen NT boxes, two multi-processor SGi servers, a dozen SGi workstations and two linux PC's. Maybe is an idiot, but he spends most of his time rebooting and re-installing the M$ NT boxes. People at the top (the decision makers) are being told this by many other people. Maybe they'll see Sun's alternative as a good one. Though I would not bet on it. These people are not always the smartest.
Good luck to Sun!
I'll do it for cheesy poofs.
>Sun needs to realize that people like their PCs.
>Whether you run Linux, Windows, MacOS, BEOS,
>whatever. We moved away from the
>mainframe/terminal paradigm for a reason
Sorry, I forgot, what was the reason?
I agree with you as far as the home market is concerned. But when it comes to corporate IT I can tell you that mainframes and thin-clients are very much alive. I personally don't like MS Windows Terminal Server, but the centralised appoach to IT facility provision is something that all medium-large companies should look at. Think of all the Windows registries that can corrupt themselves on a Workstation-Server network, now consider where you have 1 machine and Windows terminals off that 1 machine, there's only one point of corruption. X-Terminals have no moving parts.
Of course where Microsoft Terminal Server has failed is in uptime statistics - If you are going to base all your applications on the same (cluster of) machine(s) then you need high reliability, this is something that was present with UNIX and X-Terminals, but is seriously lacking in Windows Terminal Server.
We still use a mainframe for all our production systems as well. Our accounts systems still run on SCO and users connect to it via telnet.
As sysadmin, the last thing you want users to do is be able to install their own software, viruses and games and so on. This just creates overhead for support staff. The last company I worked for didn't even allow floppy disk drives on their workstations.
We just had this happen yesterday. I've got this big 350MHz PII with 128MegRAM and 6Gig or disk space sitting on my desk, but where are all my files? Out on the network, where they can be backed up, and where they are accessible to other machines (notably my UNIX account), or served out of the ClearCase SCM server. When one of the servers go down (this whole place teeters on top of a sprawling Netware/NT/Unix pile of spagetti, so servers go down quite often), the whole place can go dead in the water. I can sort of limp along sometimes, but NT gets very flaky when it can't find things.
Your Servant, B. Baggins
Cheap PCs are cheap up front. The thing is, the hardware cost is nothing compared to the cost of maintaining the things. Sure, a well-managed *nix workstation is easier to manage than an NT box under SMS or Tivoli, which is easier to manage than a Mac, which is easier to manage than a Win95/98 PC.
/. testosterone-fueled lust for playing with computer guts isn't shared by most people, nor will it ever be. Nor should it. Most people want nothing more than a foolproof, zero-maintenance way to run a range of general-interest apps. Sooner or later, the PC as we know it is going to become something only developers and hackers will want. Everyone else will be perfectly happy to plug away on a ROM-based box with high-speed net connectivity.
But all of these things, with their varying hardware, their local filesystems, and in too many cases their local apps and OS, are a total money pit compared to running thin clients, whether they're pure terminals, or something with local CPU but no local disk-based apps and data, like this.
Past NC attempts have been underpowered, and viable apps outside vertical markets have been few. But at some point, large businesses will be more than ready for the right thin-client machines.
Besides, our own
Will Sun Ray succeed? Ehh. The odds are certainly against it. Will something like it succeed in the next couple of years? Yup.
Take a public library's card catalog system....
They don't need to shell out $600 up front for each machine to access their server.
And when you're looking at the time value of money, $10/month over 5 years is not the same as $600. Hell, if it was, I'd gladly borrow $600 now to only have to repay $600 in 5 years.
Also, with non-profits, such as libraries, I don't think they can get the tax benefit of depreciating equipment, although I've been known to have been wrong before.
Just because this model doesn't fit your needs, doesn't mean that it doesn't fit anyone's needs.
This fits almost anything 'kiosk' like.
Build it, and they will come^Hplain.
Sun Help's Rumor Page contains some corona references.
One of our clients has a fairly large LAN, quite a few users, and only a few central databases that have to be used from every location. Fairly low- speed lines are used to connect everything together. (most common speed is 64 - 128 kbit. We use MS terminal servers now, to give the users a decent performance and a GUI.
With this setup we have to maintain PC's, regular office servers and terminal servers. This setup also confuses the hell out of a lot of the users, as they are not able to discern between local and remote.
I can see definitely see an application here for this technology. It would make stuff easier for both users and sysadmins.
Message on our company Intranet:
"You have a sticker in your private area"
beauty is only a light switch away
Re video: 1280x1024bit with 25 frames is about 98Mbit, so unless it does scaling in hardware, fullscreen would be pretty tough.
Another "feature" is that are so distinct (not, actually but-ugly) that theft is not really a problem. I guess you also need som propritary Sun software to make them run? Not enugh just to plug 'em into a Linux box with a few X's running ;) Morten
heck yah! The idea, anyway, not Sun's implementation...
Rocking linux box with microlinux's in almost every room? you know it!
~mindlace
I think the specs are part of the white papers. It's custom software. Imagine having a long keyboard and mouse cable to a big server that you're sharing with a bunch of other people who have really long mouse and keyboard cables.
You attach your printer to the server or better yet use network printers. Either way it's the sunray server that does all the talking Private Public SunraySunray ServerCorporate LAN
Please discuss why you believe this. Has Sun announced that they're discontinuing the rest of their workstation product line? Was there some other hint or private correspondence you can share?
``and they need to realize that won't happen. ''
Daring not to speak for them, but it's entirely possible they realize there's room for more than one computer deployment model in the world. If not, your message may be just the one to pull them back from the brink of disaster. If so, good work!
I see alot of posts equating PC with Windows. Most go something like "Sun is cheaper because users are screwing up their registries". Its kind of disconcerting that there seems to be a party line, and that it's just wrong.
Take your $566 PC and lease them, or buy them, your choice. The time value of money argument is gone. PC = financial flexibility; Sun = 5 year plan.
Load Linux/BSD and X. Presto, instant "thin" client with a great deal more flexibility. Server getting a bit loaded? Push out a few apps onto the Bazigaherz, Baziagagig desktop farm. Network slowing you down? Again, put out a few apps. PC = IS support options; Sun = no options.
Use the server's of your choice. No more Sun Lock-in. Lock-in != cheaper.
If you want to get your employees off Windows, fine, do it. Try Linux/X, it is not Windows and it is cheap. Any UNIX allows a good Admin to support many desktops just as easily as a single server. No more hoards of support people.
Pushing your TCO from the MS pot into the Sun pot just isn't a real effective way to do things. There are far, far, better tools out there to help you with your problem in a more cost effective way.
Does anyone know how these things boot up? Do they boot from ROM or from TFTP?
The NCD X-Term I'm using boots up using TFTP but I think it also has a pcmcia slot if you want to add local storage. The newer NCDs are really nice, the one I'm using has a nice 17 inch monitor and the NCD has a telnet, and www clients builtin in the rom. It also has a jvm or something since it can run java apps!
"When you sit with a nice girl for two hours, it seems like two minutes. When you sit on a hot stove for two minutes, it
We are exiting from Micro$oft Pc era and we are entering to $UN Server era.
Life is too short...
1. Real Computers are not necessary, except for what I term "Power Users", (and games)
2. The whole point of these terminals is that they will not age, they run a protocol across the network, if the user requires higher spec. then you will either make him a power user or upgrade your main server that these boxes run off.
3. Windows Terminal Server - Microsoft have already entered the market.
4. WTS looks like Windows NT, so retraining is not necessary. Your point about the cost of the server is true, however, and often overlooked. The overall configuration for 1 (50 user) Terminal Server is less than the configuration for 50 users.
Just so that this doesn't look like an advert for WTS I would like to point out that it's reliability is appalling, if you consider Thin-Client technology ask yourself whether you can use X-Windows with Linux or a BSD variant or wait until Microsoft improve it's reliability (a long wait me thinks)
I take 'book sized' as meaning something similar to the monorail machines...
... ignorant masses' that you don't work in technical support. (Or, people in Ireland aren't as brain dead as the rest of the world).
esentially, it's a 1.5-2" box with a portable screen, that mounts on a stand...
Once they strip the CD-ROM, floppy, downsize the HD, though, they could conceivably be not much more than an LCD monitor, with a keyboard/mouse port on 'em.
And I'd guess from your statement 'it's been at least three years since the populace were
And you don't need a computer to connect to 'the internet'. Hell, in a few months, PCS phones will do it. There are home-sized e-mail phones already. And many of us grew up on wyse terms and the like.
Build it, and they will come^Hplain.
Sun has the right idea with this technology. From the standpoint of their business, it makes perfect since. Sun sells servers. Why not create an addition market for themselves? If they can pull it off, so be it.
It also makes sense from the corporate network standpoint. Less redundancy from individual desktops, less configuration that the user can foul up from their cubicle. No, it isn't perfect. There are compatibility issues, storage issues, flexibility issues. But it's at least worth a try.
However, I think this is one more piece of technology that will probably never make it in the real market. End users are too attached to their PCs, and when anyone tries to market a product that performs much the same things as an exisiting product (the PC), but sacrifices some degree of functionality in lieu of price or space, the new product generally fails.
So open that closet, push aside your Beta VCR, your Newton, relocate the space you've been saving for that Mini-disc player, and toss the Sun Ray inside.
Sun isn't interested in using the best tools for the job - they are interested in explicitly not using Microsoft products anywhere. They are fairly unique in this sense.
As far as I know it is just basically something like an X Terminal. It doesn't offer any computing power to applications. It just displays the GUI and hands back input (mouse, keyboard) to the server. So this is not really a thin CLIENT but just a Input/output device. Personally i think it is way to expensive for that.
ATM's can handle things like this. I'm amazed at the range of e-commerce tasks that can be accomplished at some ATM's now. I can buy amusement park tickets, stamps, and other straightforward purchases directly from the ATM. I expect soon I'll be able to pay traffic tickets and get movie tickets from ATM's as well.
I'm not quite sure how this will play out, but it seems to be an overlooked factor. In terms of hardware cost, a network of independent PCs would seem cheaper to upgrade because there's such tremendous pricing pressure in that very competitive market segment. However, when you consider the human cost of upgrades, the thin-client solution starts to look pretty attractive. You can pretty much swap one server machine and everyone gets the benefit, without having to run around upgrading hundreds of differently-configured PCs. If you actually do need to upgrade the clients, that's easy too because the clients are stateless. Take the new one out of the box, switch cables, put the old one in the box...voila!
I know there've been lots of other thin-client paradigms, from Sun's own diskless (my brother always called 'em "dickless") workstations to X terminals etc., but somehow this one reminds me of nothing quite so much as Plan 9. It's really not a bad idea. The question is whether Sun - whose track record in these areas is less than stellar - can execute the idea well.
Slashdot - News for Herds. Stuff that Splatters.
... but it runs the Phantom Menace trailer great. Especially with a set of Bose speakers and subwoofers attached.
I could simply say printf ("hello\n"); Where did you manage to compile that? You are simply denying the facts. Now imagine setting up a *PC*. You are denying another really crucial fact: Even the most computer-illiterate people are able to go the store, get a PC, switch it on, and start doing whatever they are able to do. Why do you think KDE and Gnome were created? Because there is a whole world out there, of people who need to crank out a letter, a quote, a few formatted tables, and are not interested in dealing with the details of setting up servers, networks, et cetera. I'm going to order a handful of the boxes and pass them out to our database group. Until your users start complaining to the boss, and point out, rightfully, that they are making all the money for your company, and that they want you off their back.
... that Sun sells more UNIX desktops than any other vendor? Sun is NOT just a server company.
Sound like old tech to me ... maybe they could sell a few more server this way. I could use vnc with a cheap PC to do this ... well almost, except for the video part and sound ... I think we should create remote sound driver too
>What's amazing to me is that Microsoft gets most >of the hatred, but it's actually Sun and Apple >who are far more nefarious in their >dealings.
Oh please expound on these nefarious dealings Sun has had, or did you just pull that statement out of your ass? Put it back if you did.
And no, this is not aimed at power/personal/home/soho users. Who would accept them anyway, would you, you power/home/personal user ?
A lot of the people in the physics department where I work use NCD X-terms for their work. It's a nice solution: all your data is backed up for you, you have most of the apps you need(Latex, netscape, emacs, vi, etc.) And most importantly you have access to a really powerful cpu when you need it. A pc might be nice but I want to be on the alpha server when my apps start tossing around arrays of 10,000 double precision floating point numbers.
"When you sit with a nice girl for two hours, it seems like two minutes. When you sit on a hot stove for two minutes, it
the _post_, not the quote.
-- your knees hurt, don't they?
Infoworld reports that the listed price has no monitor
LJS
> I wonder if the Sun Ray could work off of an open source Linux solution? Well, you could just get a diskless linux box, and run the svgalib-based VNC viewer on it. Connect to Xvnc, and you've got pretty much the same thing... :-)
>Even at $10/month, a company would be stupid to >commit to five years.
I agree five years is too long, but mainly from a psychological standpoint. Actually it is not necessarily financially stupid if you run the numbers and factor in time value of money. Even if the company rips all the things out and throws them in the basement at the end of three years, and continues to pay the lease fee for two more years, it's no different from ripping out your three year old computers and throwing them in the trash. Either way you kiss your cash goodbye and have a bunch of nearly useless junk around; the difference is how _quickly_ you let go of the cash.
A lot depends on how effectively the company can put the increased up front cash availability to use. At a 10% interest rate this is equivalent to buying a sub $400 PC; at 15% this is like buying a sub $300 PC and at 20% this is like buying a sub $250 dollar PC. Of course this is a simplistic analysis, since the real cost savings occur in management and service, but its not uncommon for companies to lease PCs simply to improve cash flow, and a $10 montly outlay to equip somebody with basic office software is pretty attractive.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
I can understand the need for centralized network management. I myself maintain networks full of NT boxes. Although it isn't as simple as it should be, it's come a long way. Correct configuration goes a long way in this regard (I manage a farm of a few dozen NT boxes from a few thousand miles away, and havent had a problem).
:)
Centralized management is very nice for large deployments (I realize a few dozen boxes isn't that big of a deal), but it depends on the setting. If you have hundreds of users who aren't doing much more than glorified data entry, I'm sure the mainframe/terminal concept works well. But in the production enviorments I've worked within, it's simply not possible. Granted, most of the environments I've been involved with have been mainly development enviornments, but even the users who weren't directly related to development could not get by with a jacked up terminal.
The point I'm trying to make here is that as technology continues it's drive into the mainstream, users will become more savvy and will demand more from their computing environments.
Do you honestly think that a company that decides to save money by reducing IS costs will be better off than a company that empowers it's employees by putting a PC on every desk?
Obviously, it would depend on the employees, if you have people with ability, who can use the resources of a PC (as opposed to using only the applications the network provides), it's well worth the additional cost in my opinion.
The companies that win are the ones who hire the best people they can, and give them as much flexibility as possible to do their job. And the mainframe/terminal paradigm is by and far unflexible from a user's perspective. Although flexibility does sometimes come at the cost of sysadmin sanity.
In a 100bT environment, there shouldn't be much lag at all, and if you want to run a heavier load--buy more servers (yay for Sun ;)
Upgrading and system maintainence time and cost is severely reduced--you upgrade one machine, not 200. It will encourage constant upgrades for every new patch, fix, and version, making all the systems more secure.
As for 'obsolete within 5 years', look at what the 5-year hardware is: monitor, mouse, keyboard. These things don't become obsolete (with the possible exception of monitor size.
They are X-terminals. X-terminals have there uses. A corporate environment where users need to store or retrieve data from a server would benefit from this sort of application. No more loading 5MB databases over the network--the only network traffic is keystroke/mouse movement/x-display information.
For the home user--no, it's a waste of time. For a corporate user, this could solve a lot of problems the PC created.
Dave
Dumb terminals went out years ago. Get a clue: The network is not the computer. The network extends the computer.
Is this the act of a company desparate to come out with something new? If so, Sun Microsystems is is real trouble.
As far as I understand the SunRay (code named Corona inside Sun) works as you would expect an Xterm to work. The difference is that Sun can now deliver the screen bits of Microsoft software to such a device kind of like PCAnywhere but one window at a time. The major tech hurdle I see which isn't addressed in any article as yet is the simple fact that Microsoft software is built with the assumption that it is running for one user on one machine. I don't know how Sun is able to install one copy of MSOffice and then allow 1000 people to use that same installation without confusing it. Further, where is that software installed? On a Sun machine running Solaris? I don't think so. It may be that you have to have an NT Server around to run the MS Software (I don't know for sure, anyone have any information on this?).
I do know that there is no "OS" on the machine, there is no browser based GUI requirement or anything like that and it can print just fine. They learned that lesson with the JavaStation.
IMHO this is a bad idea, but I've been wrong before,
-BurdMan
It's already up on Sun's home page and gues what: you *NEED* a Sparc Solaris server to run these things . They're cute but I doubt anyone is going to tie themselfs to Sun for five years (unless they already were a Sun client) for pure aesthetic reasons ...
.... *CRUNCH*)
I think the damn things won't even suport standard, run-of-the-mill X, since they demand authentication from a new authentication manager running on solaris....
No, I can't spell!
-"Run to that wall until I tell you to stop"
(tagadum,tagadum,tagadum
-"stop...."
Two points here regarding the Sun Ray and Open Source:
:)
1] These boxes are a great way to push open-source applications to the business community. A site that is running a Sun Ray solution will easily be able to adopt OUR software. Its UNIX, folks.
2] Hmmmm... a little more nefarious, I suppose. I wonder if the Sun Ray could work off of an open source Linux solution?
Even at $10 / month? At 10% interest, $10 / month for 5 years has a present value of $470.65 If that includes a decent monitor, mouse, NIC, and smart card reader, it sounds like a great value to me. Of course, Sun can probably afford to sell them at no profit since you also need some number of servers and probably special proprietary software to manage serving apps to the clients...
Bravery, Kindness, Clarity, Honesty, Compassion, Generosity
...Nothing interesting here. Just move along...
I run a 50-client network for a small manufacturing shop and, if something like this were cost-effective, I think it would work well in this environment. Most of the work we do is in our ERP system, which is all run off the server already. I've got about 6-10 folks who do heavy duty number crunching or other weird stuff that i'd want PCs for, but other than that, a thin client would be perfect. If(and this is a big if) we would save significant cash with this route, that would mean more clients,for example, so that each plant lead-person could keep track of their own production schedule and work orders. Local storage is wasted on most people here, IMO.
Just my thoughts
According to The Register, the client can be purchased for $500.
I have a friend who works at Liberty Mutual. According to him, if you have a PC on your desk, and you install any software (repeat: ANY SOFTWARE) on it whatsoever, and you are caught, this is grounds for dismissal. Every PC's configuration comes from a "gold" CDROM that is maintained by IS. If a PC is found to have been "corrupted" by foreign software, it is immediately reloaded from scratch from the "gold" CD.
Some folks have been quite impassioned in this forum about the freedom and productivity that results from having one's own PC. No doubt there are many desktops at Liberty Mutual that are running "verboten" software, and no doubt there are copies of the "gold" CD floating around that are used to reload PC's that have "gone south," and no doubt all of this activity is occurring without anyone in IS knowing about it.
But from the *company's* standpoint, their policy is working. They don't have to run around supporting PC users (because everyone is afraid of getting caught, so all everyone ever does is reload from the "gold" CD instead of calling for help). The company believes that everything is wonderful. And the IS department believes they are in control of this wonderful imaginary world.
All of which is not unfunny. But here's the rub: IS is in charge of all the procurement decisions. And if IS is the customer, then the SunRay sure sounds like a terrific idea, doesn't it?
I guess I can relate this to my own experience as VP Engineering for a small technology company. One day a whole metric f**ckload of low-end Compaq PC's showed up in Marketing, Sales, and Administration. Some Compaq sales dude had sneaked in the back door and sold a bill of goods to guys who had absolutely no clue what they were buying (my personal theory as to why Compaq sales are off -- technical guys are pissed off at them for selling directly to the suits, and so as our power increases, we buy elsewhere for revenge). Well, those same dudes are buying SunRays.
Which begs the question, of course, as to whether SunRays are good or bad. I can see arguments both ways, most of which have already been made by others.
These devices are specifically NOT designed to operate over high-latency communications circuits.
"But I believe that the added costs of hiring more adept people, giving them the tools and resources (PCs) to use their abilities will give the company as a whole a competitive edge. THIS is the correct reason for moving from a mainframe/terminal setup."
.profile, .kshrc and all the other custom files that make my environment nice.
In certain situations, yes. But at a place like say the bank or the DMV, the question is whether you need all those creative people and the freedom that their personal computers give them. Your ideal of a few creative people versus a lot of uncreative people only applies in certain working scenarios. At say, a retail store, I don't think getting rid of thirty uncreative clerks and replacing them with two creative clerks is going to improve service.
Certain jobs are inherently non-creative ventures and in some cases, you actually want to stick restrictions on them. Thin clients are more securable than PCs, if properly managed.
And even customization of tools doesn't write out the thin client scenario. Give the users who want special tools extra space on their disk partitions on the servers, or have them added to the application area of the disk server so everyone gets it. I use a workstation at work, but my user account comes off a server, which means that I can log into any workstation on the network and get to my account which has my
It really comes down to the degree of customization allowed by IS with respect to user accounts, and how much the client/server setup allows customization. PCs only have the advantage that IS is limited in the amount of homogenization they can remotely enforce. If you have a well considered setup, users will have all the freedom they want or need.
It takes two things for this to happen, and being part of this first-hand, I think thin-clients will help:
1) Users need to get out of the mindset that their PC is any slower than their neighbor's. The reasons that the accountants get PIIIs is because they see POs coming through for PIIIs for development, and they get jealous. A thin client may help level this playing field.
2) MIS has to step in and say "No, you're not getting the upgrade you think you need". I never had the authority to do this. A corporate policy of using thin clients again may help in this situation (only x, y, and z departments get PCs. Everyone else gets TCs).
I'm not saying this is a cure-all, and there are obvious holes, but it'll certinaly help.
Yeah, I'd pay $10/month (+ the one-time cost of good speakers, unless it has really good built-in sound) for the ability to run streaming media into my bedroom, etc, assuming that I could run the server on a Linux system or something similarly inexpensive.
OTOH, what might it cost to put together a reliable PC-based Linux system as a comparable X-Terminal? Hmmm...
most corporate IT departments have a five-year upgrade cycle. Which means, if they switch now, it will be five years before they reevaluate alternatives anyways
Hey, this has some serious implications for US:
1] Don't overlook the obvious. These things run UNIX! The majority of open-source programming is in UNIX. This opens a clear path for the invasion of open source software into the enterprise. Yummy.
2] I wonder how much participation that something like Linux could have here. In their presentation, they talked about presenting NT apps via a Citrix server. Perhaps it can service Linux applications as well. Hmmmmm...
Look around at your average office - how many people are really using their machines, actively, solidly? Not many.
One Sun technician I was talking to about this product (some time ago) said that empirically you can get 25 or so power users per CPU. Sun servers scale up to 72 processors. You do the math :-)
Looking at the specifications of the SunRay terminal, I think the unit will primarily be used on systems that doesn't require complicated user interaction, things such as Point of Sale (POS) terminals.
Unfortunately, today's desktop requirements are MUCH more sophisticated than that! They need quality word processing and spreadsheet functions, not to mention surprisingly sophisticated e-mail front ends. If you try to run such apps for the SunRay, you'd better hope you have a powerful AND fast server and also everyone is connected on 100BaseT Ethernet cabling.
Given that Larry Ellison of Oracle has even soured on the concepts behind SunRay, I don't think it'll be a big success outside of the POS terminal niche market.
Raymond in Mountain View, CA
Please someone correct me if I am wrong, but it seems to me that the difference is in the complexity of the hardware. X terminals run a full X server locally in their firmware. This device is just a frame buffer with a monitor, so it needs an X server running on the machine it is connected to.
What then are the advantages/disadvantages:
- this device has simpler hardware and therefore it can be much cheaper than an X terminal. It works like if the server had several sets of monitor/keyboard/mouse instead of just one.
- It is simpler to set up at first than an X terminal, but on the other hand it after it is set up, XDMCP or some similar protocol can make either easy to configure
- it takes more CPU time of the server, so you need more server power to move these devices than a stack of X terminals.
Well as for prices of X terminals, it depends on who makes it. The HP envizex II terminals, for example can in some cases update their screen faster than the system they are connected to. Of course you have to pay for this performance gain. Other terminals are not as fast nor expensive.
The diskless workstation was the result of an observation: Ethernet (10Mbps) is fast enough that mounting a (VERY expensive at the time) disk on a central server and accessing it over a network was about as fast as having a local disk at a machine - and with several machines it was a LOT cheaper, letting you have many more workstations of comparable capacity for the same budget.
Their first machines had a processor, some local RAM, a screen buffer, and a network interface, but the disk controller and disk were optional. Any machine with a disk could serve it to any machine that didn't have one. All machines shared most of the file systems - so you could access your files (and your neighbors, and your shared resources) from any workstation, and there could be one copy of software for all the clients. Diskless machines put their root partition and swap space on a server, too, doing the computation and graphics rendering locally but consolidating all the mass storage centrally. You got the power of a decent machine on your desk, at a fraction of the cost. And you got better disk utilization, on larger (and thus cheaper-per-megabyte) drives.
Thin client is the same idea, carried a step farther: The local network is now fast enough to shove bitmaps around rather than rendering them locally. So you can push the crunch back into the server room, too. Do the computation and the rendering in a suitable processor farm, and put just enough machine on each desk to handshake the network and unpack the graphics.
But crunch is cheap enough now that, for many applications, there may not be enough saving by consolidating it for that to be a sufficient sole driving factor in the thin-client decision. So other factors (such as security, control, labor cost, and employee moralle) will probably determine whether thin-clent takes hold or withers.
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
The question implies you don't really understand what this is - there's not really any CPU or memory to use for Beowulf. Think of this more like a big server with dozens of monitors, keyboards and mice scattered around, since basically, that's all the SunRay is - another "seat" to use the computer from.
Instead of Beowulfing together everyone's PC's, this just gives one big multiprocessor machine that they all share without having to distribute jobs over the network.
Hmmmmm... might even be more marketable to organizations that can't completely ween themselves away from a Windows App or two in the short term. Imagine one of these workgroup server having a bank of SunPCis (AMD K6 on a card), ready to launch a Windows App when needed. Yummy.
This is just a shameless ploy to encourage people to work late!
I can see it now... The day is coming to a close... People are logging out, and going home... Except that one power hungry, crazed individual in the darkened cube in the corner... He or She thinks... "I'm the only one logged in! Heheheh! 10Gb of RAM, 64 400Mhz CPU's, and it's all mine! MINE! MOOOHAHAHAHA!!! Now for a quick 'make -j 64' and then I can really boost my SETI@Home score!"
Yes! I saw it too. I think it's the first honest thing I've ever seen come out of Sun.
What's amazing to me is that Microsoft gets most of the hatred, but it's actually Sun and Apple who are far more nefarious in their dealings.
Or put it another way, if we have to have a monopolist, I would rather have Gates than McNealy, Jobs or (got help us all) Ellison.
Now I'm not so sure it's a good deal. I would need to read more about the server requirements first.
Bravery, Kindness, Clarity, Honesty, Compassion, Generosity
...Nothing interesting here. Just move along...
I always enjoy reading about people justifying terminals "Well, I wouldn't want one, but Susie down in accounting/Joe on the loading dock, etc,etc could use one". The thing about it is, people don't like being dependant on IS to take care of things. Thats why we had a PC revolution in the first place: people got tired of waiting for IS departments to 'get it', and went out and bought a bunch of PCs and took care of their needs themselves.
Terminals are GREAT in the proper environment--but users don't like them. And users, ultimately, are the ones who keep IS in business.
To address above points:
1. overly general. The notion of setup-and-forget is a good one, especially with the advent of NT
2. Five years *is* a long time in this industry, but I think the functionality we've gotten by adopting a 1 or 2 year upgrade cycle doesn't justify the associated costs.
3. Uh - sounds like it'll integrate very well, actually. That's the whole point of being able to run multiple clients.
4. Yup, you need a server. A comparatively small outlay (~10K). Long term costs for these boxes promise to be LESS than full computers - WinNT is an administrative nightmare that already requires a cadre of trained button pushers. Assuming these deliver similar functionality as xterminals, they make a lot of sense in a large corporate environment.
Xterminals traditionally allowed one to hook up a modem or a printer to them. These devices are no different.
As to your subject line: they were previously known as Coronas. Guess some beer manufacturer put a stop to that...
I feel this needs to be reiterated in the main thread.
I'm reading so much about how much easier terminals/network computers/etc are to manage. And I'm not disagreeing in the least. The time and costs required to manage a bunch of PCs grows exponetially with the number of boxes on the network. It's a given.
My problem is that everyone seems to be looking at this with a very narrow point of view. Which is also to be expected. The readers here are primarily technically proficient, intelligient people. And I'm sure that quite a few of them are full time sysadmins as well. And from their perspective, easier management and reduced cost of the network is top priority, as it should be, for the most part.
But you need to consider the welfare of the entire company (and this message is directed at business computing, since I'm sure we can all agree that none would want to give up their home PC for just a terminal).
If you have a company full of glorified data entry personell who don't have the ability/desire/intelligence/etc to use more than one or two applications, this works well.
But I believe that the added costs of hiring more adept people, giving them the tools and resources (PCs) to use their abilities will give the company as a whole a competitive edge. THIS is the correct reason for moving from a mainframe/terminal setup.
I'm sorry, lowering IS cost is meaningless if it means reducing the employees ability to do their job effectively. This of course requires the best employees possible, which is another topic altogether.
I'd much rather have one or two intelligent people with atmospheric salaries who can creatively solve problems than 30 entry level people who require a lot of hand holding and attack problems brute force. And if it costs more to maintain the network and to give them PCs for them to do what they need to do, so be it. It's a drop in the bucket compared to what they make and what they make the company.
Last time I checked,
Cyrix MII-based eMachine: $399
17" monitor: $167
total: $566
Which would be less than than $600, although you have to pay it up front. But give me a break, you really want to be using this thing after 5 years?
Couldn't confirm prices on outpost, but did find an IBM Aptiva bundle w/ 15" monitor for $799.
I'm just having a hard time finding the appeal of a thin-client solution over low-end PC hardware...
Meanwhile, on a yacht somewhere in the Pacific, Larry Ellison prepares his "I tould you so" and "That was really my idea" speeches simultaneously.
People like PCs in their homes. At the office, most people don't care. Sure there are the techies and power users that "have-to-have" a tricked out box but most people where I work just want to get their stuff done and not call tech support. I believe that thin client computing is the future for corporations. Is the Sun Ray 1 the answer? Probably not but someone will get it right eventually.
ctually, some comments:
- it is NOT X, think of it as a monitor, keyboard and mouse + a small box with very long extension cord to the Server., which in this case, is a network connection. It does not even come with a CPU, no java, no OS...ziltch..hence the claim for zero-administration.
- If we can agree that many companies are adopting mobile computing today, ie, the concept of a FLEX-Office with no fixed desk, then maybe it makes sense for the use of smart card as well, to store the "state" which the user was in before the last reboot / logout.
There are alot of negative comments in this board, I guess it strikes at the very heart of Personal computing, taking away the power from the user.
But kudos to Sun for being innovative, nobody else is being innovative at this scale today, I mean, IBM could have given away smart-suite or even open-source OS/2 but they didn't and couldn't, HP could have... well...they don't have much of a software division anyway...but Sun acquired an "almost-office" compatible and gave it away free (not sure about the open-source bit) and followed the momentum the next week by showing off a second generation thin-client.
And no, this is not aimed at power/personal/home/soho users. Who would accept them anyway, would you, you power/home/personal user ? But maybe airport consoles could be a likely target, or maybe a large corporation would find it cheaper to buy and administer servers rather than worry about ignorant end-users screwing up their PCs by incessently tweaking their win98 for the right "fucha pink" background shade.
So perhaps, one should give some consideration to those poor saps out there that needs to be protected from themselves...
tongue in cheek and a die-hard mac fan, (was OS/2 too...but that's a another story)
[Disclaimer: Sun puts money into my bank account every two weeks in exchange for waking up and reading my email.]
Corona... err... Sun Ray 1 is a stateless client. "Your entire state and user environment is running on the server, not on the desktop," states our PR clone. The cool part is that you can "run" Solaris, NT or Java apps at the same time. This includes steaming sound and video to Windows apps/plugins that never seem to appear on other platforms/OSes.
I could see this as useful at colleges and schools. Work on your paper in StarOffice with Netscape open to reference sites and MP3Spy blaring into your headphones. If you need to stop, take out your "smartcard" and leave. Whenever you get to another SunRay, put in your smartcard and everything pops up as before (no lost time, except changing the station on mp3Spy).
Caveat: They'll have to pry my Ultra 2 out of my dead, cold hands. I don't trust visions of the future that are replays of past failures.
_damnit_
_damnit_
It's my job to freeze you. -- Logan's Run
This is obviously not a "one size fits all" solution, but I can see where this would do very nicely. A school library for one. Think about it, no noisy fans, no clunky cases getting kicked around... The kids can walk in, sit down at a terminal, work on their paper or whatever, and walk out. Every terminal looks exactly alike, and you don't have to worry about some kid messing with anything on the client. Sounds like a pretty good fit to me.
Casca
I see a few problems with the whole concept:
Printing - all the benefits of an easy to use terminal disappears the moment people start needing to attach stuff to the thing. Here's an idea: if you have a fax machine (how common are those plain paper fax machines?), the server will dial your fax number to print your document...
I've played around with X over a modem, VNC over a modem, neither of them is fun.
The price works out okay - $120 a year is much less then the depreciation of a computer.
That name better be a temporary title...
Kill'em! Kill'em all!
I find this statement a bit amusing.
;-) ...Still trying to figure out how to get an Underwood to do email and icq.
it's been at least three years since the populace were luddist, technophobic, ignorant masses
Sorry to mash yer post. I agree though, this seems like an odd product. "Let's take what our users are accustomed to, a desktop computer running an operating system, and remove nearly every function. Tie them to a proprietary and costly server/client system. Then return it to them at the same cost as what they had before. This is the wave of the future!!" I'm not biting.
SUN: Gimmie a sub-notebook with an ergonomic keyboard, a looong long battery life, and a built in printer. Then my portability needs will be met.
"I want peace on earth and good will toward men." "We're the U.S. government. We don't do that sort of thing!!"
As I read this article, this device is basically an X-Terminal. Which just proves that X-Terminals are great devices that aren't used nearly often enough.
:)
I used to run a 5000+ user UNIX environment, with over 500 X-terminals. Alone. By myself. With time to spare. The durn things never broke
The downside to X-terminals has been that they tend to have an up-front cost almost as high as a workstation. It could be that Sun Ray will fix this.
-- Slashdot sucks.
I mentioned this a few stories back, in the StarOffice discussion. Sun is not flexible enough to compete in the PC market, so what do they do? Try and manipulate the market to fit their business model. It's the network computer concept that they keep trying and failing with.
Sun needs to realize that people like their PCs. Whether you run Linux, Windows, MacOS, BEOS, whatever. We moved away from the mainframe/terminal paradigm for a reason.
This drives Sun crazy, since it threatens their extremely high margin server business (talk about price bloat). Where do you think Sun gets all these millions to buy StarOffice and give it away free? Or put so much development money behind Java?
Sun is robbing people for their servers. And they'll continue to do it as long as they can.
... the computer. There are a number of comments stating that these terminals are some kind of entry into a market Sun doesn't have. I don't feel this is true.
These terminals are just like periferals for their servers. I mean you almost have to buy a Sun server for these terminals, and that is the point. All Sun is trying to do is add more monitors and keyboards to their servers to expand the use of the server itself.
This product shouldn't be a surprise, I mean the whole network is the computer + JINI deal ALL points to this being the next logical step. Next you will have ways of clustering the terminal servers so that one a server get bogged down then a server with less traffic can take some CPU load, then add a little more scalability to the server with greater processor and storage options. Add things like USB Zip drive support and now you can store your files on a zip disk and etc... All seams to be logical steps. Weather they are marketable, who cares... Sun practically HAD to do this in order to keep up with all those nifty vision statements. I mean.. MS is starting to make sure your email isn't stored locally... next thing you know they will have microsoft office running off the web (as star office is close to)... not like MS isn't doing the same thing here.
BortBox
The comment about telephone infrastructure goes right to the heart of the debate about networks. For critical thinking about the idea of "smart networks" and "network intelligence", see Charles Isenberg's excellent page: http://www.isen.com MJP
Don't try that "protecting the children" shit you people use to keep the tits and bad words off my TV. --Seanbaby
public class Hello {
public static void main(String [] args) {
System.out.println("Hello World!");
}
}
And in C++
include
int main (int argv, char **argc) {
cout "Hello World!";
}
I really don't see either as overly burdensome, and I can compile either to native code.
I've finally had it: until slashdot gets article moderation, I am not coming back.
I'm wondering how long it will take before Sun (or anyone else) starts giving away 10 or so thin clients with every server. I wouldn't be against trying one of these machines, but I'm not willing to pay for something that may be of no use to me at all.
May be Sun should have add-ons like a barcode gun or a cash drawer attached to these things to show people how they could be used. I could also see admins using these things as a way the securely administrate a server (only certain thin-clients can have admin privilages).
Just because you're paranoid, doesn't mean they're not after you!
Fooey. I should have known better than to try to use angle brackets in so-called "plain old text" mode. Need this weirdly named "Extrans" mode for that I guess, where text really is text.
I've finally had it: until slashdot gets article moderation, I am not coming back.
I applaud Sun's noble efforts to return to the days of the mainframe and the terminal, but they concentrate on their server-side strengths and return their creative force to the Internet and away from getting people off PCs in general.
I've been saying this for months, even before Sun bought out Star Division. Sun does have a pretty wide market in the server realm, but it has almost no real presence in the home. Sun is now going to compete openly with Microsoft for your home office or desk. Unknown to many people, Sun is a company of comparable size to Microsoft. I'm not sure what to think of this, I knew Sun was going to do it but that doesn't mean I think they should. It would be nice if you could buy a cheap web terminal that could do more than just browse the web but when companies start touting products as the end-all be-all of home computing, I lose faith in their ability to make quality products. Thin clients have been tried before and have failed miserably, mainly because of terribly slow connections to the servers from home. But now home users have something they didn't have 5 years ago, broadband. Will Sun partner with a broadband access company to prive you with high speed connections for your new thin client?
I'm a loner Dottie, a Rebel.
Windows has failed to go into a whole bunch of markets (POS, Banks, ATMs, etc.) that are still dominated by green screens because the PC/Windows TCO (think maintenance) is way too high.
The National Westminster Bank (in the UK) some time ago installed, and for all I know still has, Windows NT running on its ATMs.
I chuckled the day I went to get some money out, and every NatWest cashpoint I could find had bluescreened.....
--
This isn't the post you're looking for. Move along.
--
"This isn't the post you're looking for. Move along."
1. SunRay units requires NO network configuration. Users just plug the unit into the network, power the unit on, and the unit auto-configures (via DHCP?). Truely plug-n-play!
2. SunRay's SmartCard support allows user's desktop to move with the SmartCard. In a demo, while the user was logged into a session, the SmartCard was removed and the SmartCard was inserted into ANOTHER SunRay. The desktop session appeared INSTANTLY in EXACT same state as the original SunRay (e.g. sound volume, cursor position, and Quake running). Very impressive.
3. Desktop session survives power-cycle. In a demo, I saw of SunRay power-cycled while connected to a desktop session and the unit immediately displayed the original desktop session after the boot process finished (in about 15 seconds).
4. SunRay supports Quake.
Sun has a serious credibility problem if it only provides a server-side solution. Especially when their biggest software initiative, Java, is really directed at displacing Windows on the desktop.
Sun's roots are in Workstations, they still make money in Workstations and have done suprisingly well in this market. I believe you'll find that they are not losing market share there.
This will sell well into accounts where Sun already has a strong Server presence. In completes their offerings. Now, Sun can more seriously address the whole IT infrastructure.
Sun will try to make this a lever into new accounts where those with lots of Windows desktops have been concerned that there would be integration problems. This may be an uphill battle for Sun.
There could be a huge growth potential here in "green screen" applications. Windows has failed to go into a whole bunch of markets (POS, Banks, ATMs, etc.) that are still dominated by green screens because the PC/Windows TCO (think maintenance) is way too high. If Sun is able to get an attractive TCO here, then the NC could finally take off. These markets are extremely conservative, so they have not been attracted by the Java/NC hype today. If Sun can deploy a lot of working NCs they might be able to better make inroads. Once they had a significant presence in these kind of applications, a lot of typical desktops could follow.
Microsoft is trying to address the green screen market with various Windows CE initiatives. If Sun looks to be making inroads here, expect a huge investment on Microsoft's part to fight it.
It is an intolerable situation for Sun, in the long term, for MS and/or Linux to dominate the desktop in their accounts. Ultimately, Linus is right, who controls the desktop controls the industry.
Sun is brilliantly trying to solve the wrong problem; and basing their strategy on yet another illusion. Their most notorious illusions include Java and thin clients.
... static void public main(argv[], ... and so on ...
For example, "write once, run anywhere", because it's written in Java. Yes, but there is Java 1.0, 1.1, 1.2, 1.2.1 and your nice little application that uses the swing widgets is unfixeably incompatible with 75% of the existing Java platforms. If Sun stops issuing new versions of Java, the language will die, but if they do, the whole exercise will increasingly defeat the object.
It's among the realities of this life that even low-level C/C++ source code is much more portable than Java bytecode. At least you can fix the problems, if you have the source code.
In every of their technologies, Sun makes the same stupid mistake. It's quite simple to understand what is going wrong. If you look the problem space, you can see simple and complex problems. If you look at the solution space, you can also see simple and complex problems. Now, look at the possible combinations.
(1) A simple solution for a simple problem.
(2) A complex solution for a complex problem.
Ok. The complexity of the solution scales with the complexity of the problem. Everybody expects this and I don't see anybody having a problem with this.
(3) A simple solution for a complex problem.
This is what people call "breakthroughs". You must be almost a genius to achieve this.
(4) A complex solution for a simple problem.
This is the area where you people really pissed of with you, and with reason; if you do this too often, you may get thrown out of the office.
The more you look at what Sun is doing, the more you discover options that are typically area (4).
1) Java. Well, just print "hello" in Java:
2) Thin Clients.
Ok. I've got this application "Hello world" application here and I want to run it in that thin client, as a test, just to try.
Oh no. I need a server first, that's why I need a network too. Someone must configure dhcpd/ip/dns/etcetera on the server first. Now someone has to configure all the security, even though there's only one user (who's only going the do a little test and then move on). I need to create user ids/home dirs/user groups. Now the thing is not going to run, because I need the specify the options for load balancing. Do you need a proxy-server running on the server? If you don't answer the question, I will send millions of error messages in your face.
Just to get the one application up and running, only for 1 minute, you will be tweaking, configuring, installing, uninstalling, setting, re-setting, debugging, and then give up, because your program was compiled in java 1.6.9.9 VM, and the install-cd features the java 1.5.9 VM.
Why is the fat client PC so appealing? Because it scales easily from 1 PC stand-alone, to 5 or 10 PCs in a small network, to 10,000 PCs in their lans, connected through wans, internet, and so on. At every stage of growth, you will, of course, need to re-structure your solution, and adapt the problems that occur along with growth. But no one will ever force you to solve the problems of very large networks, when you actually have a simple, and small one!
So, who will buy solutions from Sun?
(1) People, who truly don't understand the technology, not even at the most basic level, and are impressed with the fact that it is very complex (in their ignorance they think that because the technology is complex, it will be able to solve complex problems.)
(2) People, who enjoy complexity for the sake of complexity (you can even seek to make a challenge out of going to the bathroom, by placing traps in random places. Fun! Fun!).
(3) People, who seek job protection by implementing solutions that are very hard to understand (and that only they and very few other people can understand).
It's comming around again, the call to make computers as easy to use as a toaster. Network-schetwork, can it cook my breakfast????
Does it run Quake?
At first I thought this plan of Sun's was a dumb idea. They keep having this same dumb idea, and it keeps flopping, and then they have the idea again. Corporations that try to do this run into too many problems and complaints. I remember when they tried to centralize our applications where I used to work. We tried it, but when our requests for having certain applications installed on the central server went ignored and delayed for weeks-months-indefinitely, the users rebelled, and we actually re-installed our own computers with new operating systems.
But, then I thought some more about it, and I decided it still won't work, but Sun could be trying harder, it seems to me. Why are they charging for the boxes? For the terminal? Seems they ought to be giving that part away. Get more people to buy their servers, and they should be golden. If companies can give away free PC's for a commitment of internet access, why can't sun give away this worthless garbage for a payoff of more $100,000 servers being bought? Why is it Sun always seems so damn smart and yet so damn dumb all at the same time?
First, make it work, then make it right, then make it fast, then, make it bloated!
What exactly is the on-the-wire protocol? Are
they going to release it? Is it going to be
tied up in patents? Anyone looked at recent
Sun patents?
If it is a proprietary wire protocol, only
spoken by Solaris/Sparc executables, I'm going
to be pretty unhappy with the whole thing.
-- cary
The general impression I'm getting is that people see this as a thin - client
... you plug in ... all the station does is recieve the display commands and
... no 2-year obsolescence and little-to-no
; this is NOT the case!
Rather, they're ( as I see it ) a box with an X server in rom
your SmartCard, and this thing identifies itself to the server and resumes
your X session
fire them to the monitor.
No processing, no storage, minimal RAM ( must be some sort, acting as cache
)... basically nothing.
The upside is, there's also nothing to become obsolete. Need a faster
processor? Upgrade the server, which affects ALL the Sun-Ray clients. More
RAM? New software?
And as to cost: The figures I've seen point to the average cost of maintaining
/ supporting a corporate PC at ~$2000 / year. That's for help desk, hardware
and software upgrades, repair and configuration.
For these stations, none of that applies ( unless the hardware is faulty, but
that's warranty, right? ). Rather, all the maintenance / support is at the
server side, where silly users CAN'T play with RegEdit while you're not
looking.
THERE'S where the cost savings are
support necessary!
The fact that no one understands you doesn't mean you're an artist.
sun is like don quixote (sp?) thinking theyre gonna replace the pc...mcnealy and crew need to get it thru their skulls that NOBODY WANTS A JAVA PC!!!! thin-client is good some of the time but theres no reason not to have productivity apps locally hosted...processor power is cheap. sun is not a consumer company, concentrate on providing developer tools and platform and chill out.
-- your knees hurt, don't they?
What many of the thin client vendors (and many in the Open Source community) miss out on is that not every business is using computers to run MS Word, Excel, and IE. We're running a scheduling a business package on an Alpha Microsystems box (?) and using dumb terminals. Sadly, I can't just use VT100 emulation, as the emulation mode is called AM-65. Looked high and low a few months back, and the only terminal emulator I found is made by the SOB's who make the system. Yes, we are looking to replace it, but the funds to transfer the information from the old system to the new just aren't there.
Then there is the vendor of our computer based medical records system. Unhelpful. Totally MS based. No chance of Open Source (we are a "development partner" and we can't even get the source. Not that there are any programmers here, but it's the thought that counts. What we do is develop templates that are then passed around to the other users without credit being given). No chance of a Linux, X (in general), Wince, Palm, or MacOS port.
So what does that have to do with these new terminals, or any thin terminal? Quite frankly, I'd love to use them here at the office. Doctors are not the most technically savvy folks. Sure, they can use the latest laser to burn away part of your colon, but I have yet to meet one who could program their VCR (lest the MD's flame me, I've been around docs since I was born. Unless you're about 60 years old or so, I've been around more docs than you) Anyway, thin clients would be a lot easier to manage, and would give me more time to start my business from my cubicle. But the numbers don't make a damned bit of sense. For just a tiny bit more than $10/mo, I could lease a MUCH better machine (even if it's saddled with NT, which, once running, is much better than 95/98). Of course, I'll be leasing for only three years, as a five year lease for computer equipment is foolish. We've got some stuff due to be finished with the lease in about six months, and the leasing companies are hard pressed to give us a buyout, as there isn't much of a market value for 486/DX4's and Pentium 66's.
So while thin clients are nice, the lack of supported applications is sad, the price is absurd, and it just doesn't work. Thin clients work quite well with CLI's, but until someone has a sanely priced graphical client, what's the point? Wyse and Sun have missed the boat. If they are going to make this work, they are going to have to work with vendors and developers to come up with more web enabled apps, java apps, and other tools that are not as mundane as word processors.
Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
I just can't warm up to the whole "thin client" idea. It seems to be a good idea for the sys-admin in some situations, but I really don't see it appealling to a lot of people. I can't see having my critical data on some far-away computer that I have to get from a lan or the net. If it's critical to my job I want that data on my box where I can get it at any time. I don't want to rely on a network connection.
Sun is also fighting some serious momentum from the application side. People will want MS Office in almost all situations. But hey...you have to give Sun credit...if they keep going up to the plate swinging they are bound to stumble on a great idea somtime.
They are _extremely_ dumb, not even X terminals. Instead you have a terminalserver, that runs one X server for each SunRay terminal. Then the bitmapped graphics is transfered over the network, in some compressed format, all the terminal does is send the keyboard and mouse events the other way, and put the graphics in the framebuffer. Exactly like VNC and Citrix, not something that sounds very intelligent.
I have only used them briefly, but they actually seem very fast. Ofcourse I don't know how they stack up under heavy load. Don't expect fullscreen MPEG on them though
Tech details: 1280x1024 @ 76 Hz
24-bit colors
10/100 Mbit Ethernet connection
Composite video input
Stereo audio out/Mono microphone in
4 USB port
ISSO approved smart card reader
The setup is 100 terminals, with 50 each on a Sun250 Terminalserver (Dual USparcII, 2G ram)
These only do the graphics, 50 X servers on each there is a HPC6500 for the CPU power with a couple of E10K to come.
I don't know if the page describing the new setup is available from the outside but try:
Databar update
Morten Olsen (not AC)
Unfortunately, the same technology that enables people to waste time is what they need to do real work. You can surf random sites on the web, or you can learn stuff you really need to know for your work. The same mechanism does both.
In other words, if you can't use one of these devices to surf the web and waste time, they are profoundly useless. Somehow I have a feeling you can - no problem.
D
----
Dorothy Parker (1893-1967) original surname Rothschild
American short story writer, poet, and critic, a legendary figure in the New York literary scene. Parker was especially famous for her instant wit and and for her satirical verses. She also wrote sketches and short stories, many of them published in the New Yorker.
Parker was born in West End, New Jersey, to a Jewish father and Scottish mother. She was educated at a convent, and in 1916 she sold some of her poetry to the editor of Vogue, and was given an editorial position on the magazine. From 1917 to 1920 she worked as a critic for Vanity Fair, and formed with two other writers, Robert Benchley and Robert Sherwood the nucleus of the Algonquin Round Table, an informal luncheon club held at New York City's Algonquin Hotel.
_damnit_
_damnit_
It's my job to freeze you. -- Logan's Run
I recall that this came up about a month ago when Steve Ballmer said something about Renting Applications for use. Of course, Since a M$ Exec said it, It was immediatly labled as "Evil" and thrown into the fires of hell, but as soon as Sun makes the hardware to make "Rent a App" possible, People seem to like the idea.
Talk about a double standard.
They've already said that the Java PC was the wrong technology.
I think we might want one. And as soon as I finish w/this, I'll be sending email to our IS head and have them get us some demo units. I'm pulling a big company away from Wyse terminals at this very moment. I don't want PC's because there are too many assholes who screw things up. Those computers are for running the business. Period. And a Java PC would be excellent. Or Xterminal (but they cost too much, I'll need several thousand units).
Like it or lump it, the success of a business computer depends on its ability to run Office. Yes, Office sucks, but its basically got 100% penetration in mid to large sized business. And no, most people do not see Star Office as a viable alternative.
Dorothy Parker said that, but it was actually "You can lead a whore to culture, but you can't make her think".
BTW, she said that in response to a challenge that one couldn't come up with a funny statement using the word "horticulture" (it was a rapid fire response).
Witty lady.
support gun control: take guns from cops
pricy but rox! Not like being there, of course.
Chuck
try { do() || do_not(); } catch (JediException err) { yoda(err); }