Just been reading Wyse's white paper on the benefits of Desktop virtualisation & it inspired some thoughts:

a) True energy savings, cost saving & environmental benefits should be within the building envelope, power & carbon. In a thin client environment the Wyse terminal box may consume 5-15 Watts but the data-centre or server farm at the other end of the LAN consumes much more. Data-centre models are vague but appear to omit, or unallocate, the massive C02 output & electrical consumption. Given the pressure within the US market and with Copenhagen looming in Dec 09 it seems likely that C02 will be subject to taxation or punitive levy. This will have to be passed to the end user at some stage. Cloud Computing & Thin Client are BUSINESS MODELS and not technology. The business model assumes you "hook people on" and encourage them to throw away their PC's by offering a large upfront advantage. Once you have them then you can pretty much charge whatever you want.

b) Security - Despite the reassurances given by Wyse and others, end-users do not like to "lose control" of the hardware. They feel very concerned when data enters the "cloud" according to our research from SMEs, Public Sector to Enterprise.

c) The impact of thin client on employment - If Local Authorities adopt thin client solutions the ICT departments will lose jobs. In certain cases enterprise wide adoption wil close the entire department. This is what makes proper new tech cool - LOCAL AUTHORITY & INTERNAL COMPANY ICT ORGANISATIONS ARE POTENTIAL VAR's of tech like SoftXpand, proven recently with our first school appointment as a reseller.

On an aside note the reliability data ( MTBF) contained within Wyse's white paper is incorrect. There is no reason why the MTBF should be higher in a Data-Centre than for a PC. I assume they are taking figures from the terminal box rather than the infrastructure, another example of making the data fit the sales proposition.

This makes me wonder; Is desktop virtualisation (VDi) the red herring in Green IT?

We’ve been throwing the idea around in the office of using an instant messenger service, possibly Microsoft Office Communications server. Instant messaging (IM) is a collection of technologies that create the possibility of real-time text-based communication between two or more participants over the internet or some form of internal network/intranet. The benefits would be;

• Allows for "instant" communications. This can save time and money as you can resolve questions or problems immediately.

• Transmits messages fast enough to allow for natural flowing conversation. Once you get the hang of it, you can easily hold simultaneous IM sessions with sales / tech.

• Eliminates phone charges.

• Allows you to document responses for your records.

• Reduces the amount of email sent and received through out the day.

• Ability to determine who is online and ready for a message. The ability to set a presence indicator is a standard feature of IM applications. You can easily see who is available to chat with you.

• Offers a discreet method to send a message while in meetings. Utilizing wireless or PDA devices is an excellent method to provide quick responses to questions.

• Gives you another method to stay in contact with us.

• Quickly transfer files over the web and push content.

• Removes frustration of not getting who you wanted on the phone.

Some of my VARs already experience the benefits of integrating IM with their existing web site. The benefits IM brings to businesses today, in the form of improved communication, collaboration, efficiency, and cost savings are too much to ignore.

What are your thoughts and what would be your brand preferences? There are various different free applications available from AOL, MSN, Google, Skype etc.

Does the education sector use it much?

Let me know,

Kind regards,

Col

I thought it'd be useful to clarify some of the misinformation being published.

SoftXpand is a software solution which is very different in its operation to other products which may appear on the surface to be similar.

It does not alter or manipulate the XP Pro OS that controls the single hardware device.

I do not wish to repeat what has previously been written, which explains in detail why only 1 copy of XP Pro OEM is required. (http://www.edugeek.net/forums/hardware/35205-softxpand-system-2.html)

We're in direct communication with M$ who have chosen not to reply. It is unreasonable to expect M$ to admit that SoftXpand does not violate their EULA as they believe that SoftXpand could be a threat to their OS revenues. You will notice that in articles like IT Pro by Tim Anderson M$ merely "urge" customers to purchase multiple licenses. I am sure that all vendors would love to sell multiple copies that are not required.

I realise that this is a complex issue and you need to understand how SoftXpand works to draw a sensible conclusion. Unfortunately very few M$ employees know how SoftXpand works and hence a variety of answers are being given by them.

Application software is a gray area as most EULAs were not written with SoftXpand in mind, however MiniFrameUK sees this as a moral issue and always recommends as many application licenses as there will be users.

Roger Anscombe MD MiniFrameUK

So for those guys n gals buying workstations in their hundreds or building their own mini data centres with thin client networks remember this;

"Green IT is about the best possible trade off between performance, economics and environmental impact". Each PC bought has already consumed around 1.7 tonnes of non renewable raw materials, been separately packed, transported and kept cool in a warehouse before being shipped again to the customer. Not to mention been built outside of the UK. If we continue at the same pace and continue to replace PCs with thin clients and stan alone PCs we will suffer at the hands of mother nature. A good resource to learn about our ignorance towards global climate change is anything written by Mark Lynas or Chris Goodall.

So there's my 2 pence worth. If I'd have been allowed to change the workshop subject to "Can you halve your desktop IT costs and have it pay for itself before it needs replacing?" I think I'dve got a much bigger audience.

Remember what happens accross the world quite literally affects us here when we speak of climate change.

What's the consensus?

Cheers,

Col