Andy wrote:
> 
> On Monday 21 October 2002 22:36, Tom Cook wrote:
> > Andy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Thin client technology....isn't that what you are talking about?
> > >
> > > I have always wondered.............why can't Linux (especially Debian
> > > Linux) do the same thing Citrix is doing?
> >
> > Citrix essentially does what X does a lot less efficiently.  X is
> > pretty much the best thin client technology around.  Why would you
> > want metaframe?
> 
> I don't want Metaframe.  I want to know if the same thing can be done
> with Linux (especially Debian).
> What he had was Win2000 with Citrix serving 20 thin client terminals in a town
> 300 miles away over broadband.  These little terminals are manufactured in
> Taiwan and I can't find the company.  They had a little slot in which to
> stick a little ATM like flash card in order to logon.  No moving parts at all
> in this little unit.  You simply plug in a keyboard, monitor, mouse, power,
> and ethernet, then your little flash card, and you get a Windows screen
> in which to run all of the Office applications, email and web, from the main
> windows server in the other town.
> 
> Thin client boxes are attractive since one does not have to deal with
> old hardware, failing memory, flaky video cards, hard drives, etc....
> 
> I want to build a Debian server and be able to serve 50-100 thin clients over
> a 100Mbps LAN.   I can build the server but I am at a loss on how to get a
> thin client running this way.
> 
> Anyone doing this with Debian?

I might have missed something in a previous post, but why not just X ?
The thin-client PCs need enough HDD space to hold an X server and not
much else. The actual applications (X clients) run on the central PC.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to