I'm not sure, but to the best of my knowledge PDF wasn't invented by Adobe
Of course it was, as was PostScript before it. Now, Adobe has published spec's on it so you don't have to use their products to read or write PDF's, but that doesn't make it "non-proprietary".
People fsck up. I realize this. Most people realize this. I put my faith in vendors that admit when they're wrong and try to correct their mistakes.
Heck, in the "real world", most likely if the client was rifling through the files on the hard drive, he'd 1) be escorted to the door (unless he was a C*O or somebody of that level), and 2) would have been looking at those "files" for several minutes before getting caught and *then* complaining.
Yeah? Well I'm the sysadmin for a school, and under CIPA, I'm required by law to start blocking all of these by July 1, because I can't monitor their content to make sure they don't contain images "inappropriate for minors".
Unfortunately, it's too expensive to be a "test case" before the court system.
Yes. But they haven't released their server product yet. Right now there's only "home" (indended to be the Win98/WinME replacement) and "professional" (indended to be the WinNT/Win2kPro replacement) editions.
The most fair thing I can come up with is to charge a business per user.
While that may be "fair" for a business with lots of desk jockeys, I don't think it's very fair for a few other situations.
Consider a factory with lots of laborers. Most of them won't use a computer more than a few minutes per day, if that. They could easily have 1 PC for 100 users, just so they could check e-mail / daily announcements / change orders, etc.
I know you said "businesses", but I work for a school. We are very fortunate that we have about a 3:1 student/computer ratio. Most schools have an 8:1 or 10:1 ratio. So now MS get to charge for all these people that can't even access a computer all at once?
Windows used to come with a "per seat" license, which, though difficult to define, did work for most cases. Why did they stray from that for XP?
Keep in mind Citrix sold the Terminal Server technology to Microsoft.
Not quite. Citrix licensed their "MultiWin" technology to Microsoft for 5 years. ("MultiWin" being the piece that lets MS have multiple users at once. <obMSdig>You know, like *nix has for years</obMSdig>) That 5 years is up in May.
Hmmm. Licensing runs out in May,.NET being launched. Coincidence? I think not.
When the screen comes up that says "Upgrade", "Later", etc., change your PC clock to something way far out in the future (2020 or so). Click "Later". Change your clock back.
Does this mean Apple may be looking at a real thin client solution, maybe?
Citrix makes platform-independent desktops for Windows and Unix (Solaris only last I checked, but that's been awhile). Also, LTSP is out there for Linux. I'd love to be able to buy a beefy Mac and be able to have multiple sessions running from it, especially if the client was platform-independent.
(which is why I support the federalization program currently in progress in the US)
Huh?
When somebody becomes a federal employee, they suddenly get a whole new batch of brains? If the government wanted to militarize airport security in the name of homeland defense, I could at least kinda sorta understand. (i.e., nobody comes through that hasn't at least been through boot camp, and a court martial is in order for anybody that fscks up).
Merely federalizing the employees does what? I have yet to hear a good response to this. You've got the same schmuck that worked for Schmuckville Airport, now getting paid by the federal government. The only difference is you're shifting the burden of paying for them off the 'frequent flyers' and onto the population as a whole.
Seriously, this is the best advice (and it's been repeated here a few times). Using subdomains, that is.
Now for my own completely off-topic story about 'cute' names (since that's what everybody else is telling anyway).
My first linux server was an experiment. Didn't know how long the experiment would last. So I named it 'westley'. That way we could say 'Good night, Westley. Sleep well. I'll most likely kill you in the morning.' (Incidentally, last I checked, westley is still serving web pages just fine, and that was probably 1997.)
Anyhow, it grew from there. Next up was a mySQL server. It had a lot of data, ergo 'vizzini'. We bought a Citrix server, which was very large: 'fezzik'. My own desktop became 'inigo', because it was always fighting (for more resources). I left before we got any MS servers (other than Fezzik), so I didn't get to name a 'rouen' or 'humperdinck'.
Or would you like it if everyone still drove a Ford Model T because there was no competition?
...but there was even competition in the Model T days. Ford just was an order of magnitude less expensive and worked for most people. (Hmmm... Kinda like commercial Unixes vs. Windows, huh?). Eventually, competition got stiffer and we no longer drive Model T's. (Extrapolation to the current situation is left as an exercise to the reader.)
I'm the director of technology for our small school district. We have both traditional Win9x labs and a Citrix lab. My immediate previous job experience was at a university, as well. Now that this discussion has pretty much run its course, I'd be more than happy to converse with you via e-mail (or heck, phone, if you want to call me - but you'll have to e-mail me to get my phone number), about the upside and downside to thin clients.
Microsoft only makes an RDP client for Windows, but there's nothing prohibiting somebody else (such as these guys) from making an RDP client that doesn't run on Windows. Even if you're not using MS's client, you still need to buy a TScal to be legal. This is a separate issue.
I just "upgraded" one lab (20 PC's) for $13,500 using Citrix (all licenses, hardware, etc.). $13,500/20 ~= $675/ea. and in return I have a lab that can't be messed up (at least, excepting hardware failure). Wiping a PC and re-ghosting still takes time (and it also takes somebody knowing it's screwed up etc.). Ghost has it's place, but this is much easier to administrate than any of our 4 "traditional" PC labs. Something goes wrong with one of our clients? Reboot it. It makes the client truly disposable anyway.
Oh yeah, and some apps simply will not run. WordPerfect2000 and some others come to mind.
Funny. I ran WordPerfect 2000 on ours just fine. And also 2002. Rule of thumb is that if it can be run on Win2k, it can run on terminal server. Some apps can just be pretty tricky to convince that they can do so.
The Windows Server CAL is about $10 edu pricing and the TScal is about $40-$45 edu pricing. These are both "per seat" licenses. Citrix is $200/seat retail, and if you go out for bid, you can usually do quite a bit better. Citrix, as jnik says, is concurrent licensing, if you're using Metaframe 1.8. Metaframe XP is also licensed "per seat" (and this less than a year after I heard a Citrix rep publicly ridiculing Microsoft's per-seat licensing).
Another poster (duffbeer703) talked about "built-in licenses". This is true only of Win2k and WinXP. The licenses are for that version or higher. IOW, Win2k and WinXP clients don't need a TScal for a Win2k server. A WinXP client won't need a TScal for a WinXP server (whenever it finally arrives), but a Win2k client will. If you are using Citrix, you will also need a TScal for any non-Windows clients as well. Also, check the licensing if you buy a dedicated thin client device - it may or may not come with the TScal.
As a side note, WinNT TSE (terminal server edition) had the same limitations, but didn't enforce it. In Win2k you must have a licensing server running or it won't let clients connect (and if you're running Active Directory, the licensing server needs to be running on a Domain Controller as well).
Don't forget that applications running on the server are also licensed per-seat. Can't just install one copy of Office and run the whole place.
Most likely. For MS office this is definitely true. It will pay to read the licenses that come with your software. Citrix was sued (several years ago, for their WinNT 3.51 product - WinFrame) for allowing multiple computers to share one application. Citrix won. The license said they could install it on one computer, and they did. Most software companies have changed their licenses to correct this by now, but not all.
...and it's not like this is an added expense for the thin client, it's just not an area of cost savings
Citrix is not too hard to administrate. I highly suggest getting on a support e-mail list (such as at http://thethin.net - best I've found by far).
Bzzzt. But thanks for playing and we have some nice parting gifts for you.
MIDI is not supported, only WAV (and WinAmp, etc. convert to WAV, so that's OK, too). Citrix in particular supports only soundblaster compatible sound cards on the client side, though.
Even though it is supported, does not make it a good idea, however. Sound will seriously increase your bandwidth requirements, especially if you go beyond the basic system beeps, etc. I know in Citrix if you want "high quality" (44kHz/16 bit/stereo?) sound (default is "low quality" 8kHz/8 bit/mono?), your bandwidth requirements go from the 20kbps range to the 1.3Mbps range (per client).
Slashdot Mirror
Of course it was, as was PostScript before it. Now, Adobe has published spec's on it so you don't have to use their products to read or write PDF's, but that doesn't make it "non-proprietary".
People fsck up. I realize this. Most people realize this. I put my faith in vendors that admit when they're wrong and try to correct their mistakes.
Heck, in the "real world", most likely if the client was rifling through the files on the hard drive, he'd 1) be escorted to the door (unless he was a C*O or somebody of that level), and 2) would have been looking at those "files" for several minutes before getting caught and *then* complaining.
Unfortunately, it's too expensive to be a "test case" before the court system.
Yes. But they haven't released their server product yet. Right now there's only "home" (indended to be the Win98/WinME replacement) and "professional" (indended to be the WinNT/Win2kPro replacement) editions.
While that may be "fair" for a business with lots of desk jockeys, I don't think it's very fair for a few other situations.
Consider a factory with lots of laborers. Most of them won't use a computer more than a few minutes per day, if that. They could easily have 1 PC for 100 users, just so they could check e-mail / daily announcements / change orders, etc.
I know you said "businesses", but I work for a school. We are very fortunate that we have about a 3:1 student/computer ratio. Most schools have an 8:1 or 10:1 ratio. So now MS get to charge for all these people that can't even access a computer all at once?
Windows used to come with a "per seat" license, which, though difficult to define, did work for most cases. Why did they stray from that for XP?
Not quite. Citrix licensed their "MultiWin" technology to Microsoft for 5 years. ("MultiWin" being the piece that lets MS have multiple users at once. <obMSdig>You know, like *nix has for years</obMSdig>) That 5 years is up in May.
Hmmm. Licensing runs out in May, .NET being launched. Coincidence? I think not.
Only once, if you do it right.
When the screen comes up that says "Upgrade", "Later", etc., change your PC clock to something way far out in the future (2020 or so). Click "Later". Change your clock back.
Ta-da! No more nagware.
Does this mean Apple may be looking at a real thin client solution, maybe?
Citrix makes platform-independent desktops for Windows and Unix (Solaris only last I checked, but that's been awhile). Also, LTSP is out there for Linux. I'd love to be able to buy a beefy Mac and be able to have multiple sessions running from it, especially if the client was platform-independent.
Hey, I can dream, can't I?
</speculation>
Huh?
When somebody becomes a federal employee, they suddenly get a whole new batch of brains? If the government wanted to militarize airport security in the name of homeland defense, I could at least kinda sorta understand. (i.e., nobody comes through that hasn't at least been through boot camp, and a court martial is in order for anybody that fscks up).
Merely federalizing the employees does what? I have yet to hear a good response to this. You've got the same schmuck that worked for Schmuckville Airport, now getting paid by the federal government. The only difference is you're shifting the burden of paying for them off the 'frequent flyers' and onto the population as a whole.
Brilliant.
sed 's/s\/390/z\/series/g' IBM_sales_literature.old > IBM_sales_literature.new
It's sad. Every time I see 's/390', I can't help but think 'but what are you replacing 390 with?'
Now for my own completely off-topic story about 'cute' names (since that's what everybody else is telling anyway).
My first linux server was an experiment. Didn't know how long the experiment would last. So I named it 'westley'. That way we could say 'Good night, Westley. Sleep well. I'll most likely kill you in the morning.' (Incidentally, last I checked, westley is still serving web pages just fine, and that was probably 1997.)
Anyhow, it grew from there. Next up was a mySQL server. It had a lot of data, ergo 'vizzini'. We bought a Citrix server, which was very large: 'fezzik'. My own desktop became 'inigo', because it was always fighting (for more resources). I left before we got any MS servers (other than Fezzik), so I didn't get to name a 'rouen' or 'humperdinck'.
Think we should start a club?
We have one: doublespeak
I've been interviewed by a nationally distributed magazine about technology in education, concerning thin clients. I've got no agenda, only my opinions.
Microsoft only makes an RDP client for Windows, but there's nothing prohibiting somebody else (such as these guys) from making an RDP client that doesn't run on Windows. Even if you're not using MS's client, you still need to buy a TScal to be legal. This is a separate issue.
+1, poster actually has a clue (unlike the majority of this discussion).
I just "upgraded" one lab (20 PC's) for $13,500 using Citrix (all licenses, hardware, etc.). $13,500/20 ~= $675/ea. and in return I have a lab that can't be messed up (at least, excepting hardware failure). Wiping a PC and re-ghosting still takes time (and it also takes somebody knowing it's screwed up etc.). Ghost has it's place, but this is much easier to administrate than any of our 4 "traditional" PC labs. Something goes wrong with one of our clients? Reboot it. It makes the client truly disposable anyway.
Funny. I ran WordPerfect 2000 on ours just fine. And also 2002. Rule of thumb is that if it can be run on Win2k, it can run on terminal server. Some apps can just be pretty tricky to convince that they can do so.
The Windows Server CAL is about $10 edu pricing and the TScal is about $40-$45 edu pricing. These are both "per seat" licenses. Citrix is $200/seat retail, and if you go out for bid, you can usually do quite a bit better. Citrix, as jnik says, is concurrent licensing, if you're using Metaframe 1.8. Metaframe XP is also licensed "per seat" (and this less than a year after I heard a Citrix rep publicly ridiculing Microsoft's per-seat licensing).
Another poster (duffbeer703) talked about "built-in licenses". This is true only of Win2k and WinXP. The licenses are for that version or higher. IOW, Win2k and WinXP clients don't need a TScal for a Win2k server. A WinXP client won't need a TScal for a WinXP server (whenever it finally arrives), but a Win2k client will. If you are using Citrix, you will also need a TScal for any non-Windows clients as well. Also, check the licensing if you buy a dedicated thin client device - it may or may not come with the TScal.
As a side note, WinNT TSE (terminal server edition) had the same limitations, but didn't enforce it. In Win2k you must have a licensing server running or it won't let clients connect (and if you're running Active Directory, the licensing server needs to be running on a Domain Controller as well).
Don't forget that applications running on the server are also licensed per-seat. Can't just install one copy of Office and run the whole place.
Most likely. For MS office this is definitely true. It will pay to read the licenses that come with your software. Citrix was sued (several years ago, for their WinNT 3.51 product - WinFrame) for allowing multiple computers to share one application. Citrix won. The license said they could install it on one computer, and they did. Most software companies have changed their licenses to correct this by now, but not all.
Citrix is not too hard to administrate. I highly suggest getting on a support e-mail list (such as at http://thethin.net - best I've found by far).
Bzzzt. But thanks for playing and we have some nice parting gifts for you.
MIDI is not supported, only WAV (and WinAmp, etc. convert to WAV, so that's OK, too). Citrix in particular supports only soundblaster compatible sound cards on the client side, though.
Even though it is supported, does not make it a good idea, however. Sound will seriously increase your bandwidth requirements, especially if you go beyond the basic system beeps, etc. I know in Citrix if you want "high quality" (44kHz/16 bit/stereo?) sound (default is "low quality" 8kHz/8 bit/mono?), your bandwidth requirements go from the 20kbps range to the 1.3Mbps range (per client).
Offtopic? WTF? I was getting ready to make the same comment, but wanted to see if anybody had beaten me to it.