On Wed, Jul 07, 2010 at 04:33:39PM +0200, Robert Schuettler wrote:

> I finally got around to put together the "Perfect Thin-Client" poll 
> results. 

So if we take it apart, here are the most important features (more than half
of the participants selected these):

>     98% (42) | network bootable
>     86% (37) | Linux hardware-support out of the box
>     84% (36) | low price
>     81% (35) | low power consumption
>     77% (33) | no rotating parts
>     72% (31) | silent
>     67% (29) | diskless
>     63% (27) | gigabit (GBE) ethernet interface
>     56% (24) | fanless

Perhaps not really all that surprising: Most people want a cheap and silent
machine that makes life easy for the Linux admin and has a fast network
interface. .-)

Next in line is graphics:

>     49% (21) | possibility to attach to screen (VESA mount)
>     35% (15) | high resolution (at least 1920x1200 for 24 TFT)
>     35% (15) | good graphics card (3D and/or HQ video support)

And overall usability / user-experience:

>     33% (14) | good CPU power (fast)
>     30% (13) | possibility to stand upright (next to screen)
>     28% (12) | wake on LAN support
>     28% (12) | DVI support
>     26% (11) | 100% noiseless
>     12% ( 5) | possibility to be placed under the screen
>     12% ( 5) | lots of RAM (more than 1 GB)
>     12% ( 5) | design (good looking)

And we're at under 10% for:

>      9% ( 4) | multi-monitor support (at least 2)
>      7% ( 3) | integrated card reader
>      7% ( 3) | completely integrated (screen + client are one)
>      7% ( 3) | anti-theft (Kensignton lock or similar)
>      5% ( 2) | lots of USB ports (more than 4)
>      5% ( 2) | local storage
>      2% ( 1) | wireless network interface build in
>      2% ( 1) | known vendor (not a noname box)
>      2% ( 1) | eSATA
>      2% ( 1) | USB3 ports

Pretty interesting that not many people need wireless. Local storage and
"fast" local interfaces such as eSATA or USB3 aren't of high priority either.

I would have thought that more people would want to attach more than one
screen, but then you all may have opted for the "bigger is better" support
above instead.

No-one particularly needs:

>      0% ( 0) | propritary client support (Citrix, etc.) integrated
>      0% ( 0) | mutli-monitor support (more than 2)
>      0% ( 0) | more than 1 network interface

Sine we don't have local storage, "proprietary client support" is probably
out of the question. No market for those guys here then. ;-) And adding more
than 2 screens or a single network is obviously science fiction (at least
in the Thin Client world).

Let me pick up the comments:

>  Doug Hall (Monday, June 21, 2010 4:53:05 AM GMT-12:00):
>    Sorry for the double-entry. The "save" button is too close to the scroll
>    button.  What's the difference between silent and 100% noiseless? If
>    something is silent, it make 0% noise. Perhaps you should combine the two
>    and rename it "quietness".

Yeah, I guess that was misleading and "quiet as in Acer Revo" vs. "100%
noiseless as in HP T5630W" would explain it better. But the overall results
actually show that no-one wants _any_ noise or rotating parts (fans).

>  andreas (Friday, June 11, 2010 12:19:41 PM GMT-12:00):
>    A decent audio card is also important

Agreed, but that also heavily depends on your scenario. Some users probably
wouldn't even notice is there was no sound whatsoever. ;-)

>    An integrated Linux-compatible webcam would be a nice feature and an
>    integrated VOIP-adapter with RJ11-port to be able to connect a legacy
>    analog telefone would be just perfect!

Webcam only seems to make sense if the Thin Client is integrated (screen +
client are one). And does anyone actually _have_ a VoIP-setup as described?

>  chrisjrob (Thursday, June 10, 2010 11:44:41 PM GMT-12:00):
>    Performance is important, some hardware specifically designed as thin
>    clients can be dreadfully slow.  I suspect that a reasonable graphics
>    card/chip is the key.

It is not much fun if users have to "wait" in front of their Thin Client too
much. I would agree that decent graphics, a sufficient amount of memory and
a fast enough network connection are probably the key issues here. The CPU
shouldn't be too crappy either, but that's probably always a trade-in for
price and power-consumption.

Best regards, Robert

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by Sprint
What will you do first with EVO, the first 4G phone?
Visit sprint.com/first -- http://p.sf.net/sfu/sprint-com-first
_____________________________________________________________________
Ltsp-discuss mailing list.   To un-subscribe, or change prefs, goto:
      https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltsp-discuss
For additional LTSP help,   try #ltsp channel on irc.freenode.net

Reply via email to