Some basic info.

[mrforgetful]

Hi,

 

We have around 600 Standard PCs, 7 Servers and 90 laptops.

 

I have just learned that the Bursar is holding a meeting today with one of our suppliers (who the ICT team do not like using) to discuss Thin Clients.

 

What are the benefits and pitfalls of such a move?

 

I'm guessing he's looking into it because it will be cheaper, but what really p***** me off is that. It's nothing to do with him! He is not the Network Manager or Support, he is the Bursar.

[plexer]

Then I would point that out to the head straight away I would never let anyone make these kinds of decisions ever.

 

Sounds like your bursar has ideas above their station.

 

Ben

[Geoff]

Advantages:

 

- Thin Clients are cheaper than PCs.

- Easier to load software (only needs to go on your servers)

- Easier to fix broken clients (just go and replace the thin client box)

 

Disadvantages:

 

- Network infrastructure may be unable to cope unless it's well designed, efficent and managed correctly.

- If your server(s) die, that's everyone stopped working. You can avoid this to some degree with fail over/clustering though.

- Inflexiable. It's difficult to make exceptions to the 'one size fits all' setup for a paticular department/user.

- Multimedia performance. Depending on the implementation (I've seen Wyse terminals that address this for example) performance of multimedia and 3d apps can be dire. You will probably still want fat clients for this kind of work.

- Local client perhipherals. It can be difficult/impossible to get local drives/perhiperals to work correctly. Again this depends on the implementation and what's supported by your thin clients.

[mrforgetful]

That is exactly the problem. He will not keep out of the running of the network but has the head wrapped around his finger it seems.

 

We have a long running problem with having no input, or been ignored when putting forward opinions even though it is us who has to support them.

[plexer]

Are you in a union?

 

If so get them involved if not and as an alternative to the head have a work with the chair of the governors.

 

Ben

[mrforgetful]

Unfortunately no I'm not in a Union. Never have been. My colleague was but left when she reported a couple of problems but they never got them sorted.

[plexer]

Chair of Governors it is then speak to them or write them a letter explaining the situation you are in.

 

Ben

[Norphy]

The following post is how I see it, others may disagree:

 

Benefits to thin clients:

 

Cheaper per client (assuming you're using vanilla TS anyway, Citrix is a different kettle of fish altogether)

Easier management

Easier software deployment (only have to install software on Terminal Server(s), not numerous clients.

Reduced network load

Less power usage, less heat produced, no noise if you use fanless units.

 

Downsides:

 

Not suitable for processor and memory intensive software, all it takes is one user to use a CPU hogging program to slow down the server for everyone else

Not suitable for video or graphic applications

Reduced support for external peripherals

High initial cost.

 

We are planning to deploy thin clients in our school. We intend to keep the computer classrooms with standard PCs as they are more likely to use processor intensive software. However places like the library where they just want to use Word, Excel and Internet Explorer will get thin clients. We also intend to deploy thin clients in offices for the same reason.

[CyberNerd]

Check this:

http://partners.becta.org.uk/index.php?section=rh&catcode=_re_rp_ap_03&rid=11414

 

 

"Not suitable for processor and memory intensive software, all it takes is one user to use a CPU hogging program to slow down the server for everyone else"

Not strictly true: Linux terminal servers can overcome this as can 'enterprise citrix using application isolation

 

 

"Not suitable for video or graphic applications"

--I dispute this aswell: flash is ok, but full screen gaming is not