Skip to main content

Clin thients

Visited a customerish yesterday, in Wynyard. From the description, I was expecting a big mess of Win98 & XP systems, but it seems that they’re a little more organised (sorta), than that.

“Sorta”?

Well, the actual organisation revolves around two servers, which are remote-managed. They wear the princely titles of “server” & “server1”

One of them is a Windows file-server, the other is a terminal server. Oddly enough, the backups etc are done through the terminal server, since the tape backup unit doesn’t work on the file-server, & the USB interface works poorly, if at all.

The positive aspect from the workstations’ perspective is that they’re all, basically, thin clients. The users start them, start an RDP client, & do all of their work via the terminal server.

I gather that this was done for convenience of administration, since the admin (in Devonport, apparently) doesn’t need to ensure that workstations are clocked on or whatever, just has to start a session for the user in question, & admin that.

Now, the whole arrangement just cries out for a standard Unix-like setup (X was born for this) — but there are a few show-stoppers like MYOB in the works.

Nevertheless, I’m planning to swap their standard PCs plus a few special-purpose RDP client boxes for dead-boring standard PCs which boot a Linux image (so conceptually could be replaced by a live CD) that starts dear old rdesktop aimed at the terminal server.

They’re a kind of a charity, so $$$ are quite important, as is chopping away any extra organisation needed for obtaining specialised equipment. With my grand plan in place, they can grab a bargain PC, whip out the hard disk (if any), shove a CD into it, & be on the road immediately. No licence hassles, no special cases.

Comments

Stephen Thorne said…
I saw thinlinx.com.au at an open source breakfast last week. They look interesting.
sen said…
Be careful saying stuff like that, they will need new licences for the Terminal Services CAL plus software etc.
Plus the way M$ charge for M$Office on a TS box is every user must have a lic for Office if it's accessible by them. Even if they don't use it.
Licences can become quite pricey by the time you finish counting that up.
Leon RJ Brooks said…
AFAICT they already have said licences & no wish to suffer the same pain again.

With this in mind, they're likely to try a few users out on OpenOffice to see if it works "well enough" & if so, they'll migrate more users until they have zero left.

If it wasn't for MYOB, I think they'd be quite happy running Linux throughout.
Leon RJ Brooks said…
BTW, should have said (about whipping the hard disk out) that the LiveCD would, once startup was successful, check the machine & offer to install on it if appropriate.
sen said…
MYOB runs pretty well on WINE apparently:
http://appdb.winehq.org/appview.php?iVersionId=355&iTestingId=11136

Also I've heard that Crossover office multi-user (terminal service version) works as well.

Oh and I'm not sure if you saw this, but Novel is forking OO, they don't like that SUN wont LGPL it.
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/10/03/1212234

Popular posts from this blog

An Open and Shut response to Darl McBride

Hi, Darl. I see you’re being dishonest again . It’d be really nice if you could shoot straight for a change, but I think Kerry’s Dad will be selling snowplows in Hell first. Three years ago, when I first joined The SCO Group, we focused the company on the area that was most profitable and provided the most benefit to customers, investors, resellers, developers and employees: UNIX No, you focused the company on suing people, which was most profitable to lawyers and provided some golden parachutes for your buddies. People thought we were crazy. They were right. But since SCO owns the UNIX operating system The SCO Group does not own UNIX® in any sense of the word. The Open Group owns the UNIX trademark, definition and other rights , The SCO Group does not. The SCO Group doesn’t even own the UnixWare® or OpenServer® code, the rights to those are held by Novell and TSG use them only by permission and under certain conditions — which they have violate...

5x7 text dot-matrix in five minutes...

This is a fairly primitive toy I threw together today for a specific purpose, published in case it’s any use to others... feed it a list of words as command arguments, which it will then display as a 5x7 ASCII dotmatrix with ‘#’ as a dot & ‘_’ as a blank. /* * display text using a 5x7 bitmap font in ASCII letters */ static unsigned char font [] [5] = { { 0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00 }, // 0x20 32 { 0x00,0x00,0x6f,0x00,0x00 }, // ! 0x21 33 { 0x00,0x07,0x00,0x07,0x00 }, // " 0x22 34 { 0x14,0x7f,0x14,0x7f,0x14 }, // # 0x23 35 { 0x00,0x07,0x04,0x1e,0x00 }, // $ 0x24 36 { 0x23,0x13,0x08,0x64,0x62 }, // % 0x25 37 { 0x36,0x49,0x56,0x20,0x50 }, // & 0x26 38 { 0x00,0x00,0x07,0x00,0x00 }, // ' 0x27 39 { 0x00,0x1c,0x22,0x41,0x00 }, // ( 0x28 40 { 0x00,0x41,0x22,0x1c,0x00 }, // ) 0x29 41 { 0x14,0x08,0x3e,0x08,0x14 }, // * 0x2a 42 { 0x08,0x08,0x3e,0x08,0x08 }, ...

Citizens Augmenting Government Waste

So here we have Microsoft-funded “ Citizens Against Government Waste ” (CAGW) heavily criticising Massachusetts’s switch to an internationally accepted and open document standard (not open source, open standard — but I seem to remember a large monopolist who frequently confuses the two when it suits them). I remember CAGW, they were the organisation who had dead people writing in to support Microsoft in court a few years ago — thanks to sbergman27 for the link — is this “the dead hand of CAGW” at work again? Let’s follow the money and find out. Who stands to lose the most money and control if Massachusetts switches to an unencumbered document format? Big surprise, it’s CAGW sponsor Microsoft, through their dominant MS-Office suite. Why did CAGW list Microsoft’s suite last, after two other much-less-dominant examples which are waning anyway? If you’re inclined to wallow in additional irony, consider that at leas...