Greg Twyford wrote: > David Guest wrote: > >> Yes you always have to pay the Microsoft tax. It's a saving in hardware >> and techie time not licensing fees. > > But the ridiculously prohibitive TS licenses are on top of the normal > CALs and are an extra cost not incurred if you don't go TS. For > example, I have a medical centre with eight consulting room/PM office > PCs & two front desk PCs set up back in May 2003.
I agree that Microsoft terminal server licensing is legalised theft but that's the environment everyone seems happy to perpetuate. > Since the set-up, maybe 2-3 instances where I've needed to do > troubleshooting on clients and one instance of manually upgrading to a > new version of the PM software on two front desk PCs. Server installs > of clinical and PM upgrades with automatic client updating on first > use requires minimal support. The GP does this himself. > > New printers, network hardware problems, etc., don't count in this > equation as you still have to physically install things and set them > up whether TS or local, but all the consulting room printers are > original, just the front desk behemoth has needed replacing. Not such > a big deal. You're lucky Greg. I am constantly installing new versions of firefox, thunderbird (with add ins), openoffice, etc., etc. I spend enough time at the surgery during the day to not to want to go back at night and so do all of the upgrades remotely. Still if it's your day job you probably want to maximise the amount of time you spend on the client's site. This is another reason why the current computing ecosystem maintains inefficient operating systems and economic models. Cheers. David -- "UFW. Deb does linux."
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
_______________________________________________ Gpcg_talk mailing list [email protected] http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk
