Hi Vagrant,

thanks for your answer.

Am 20.09.2016 19:34, schrieb Vagrant Cascadian:
> On 2016-09-20, Rolf-Werner Eilert wrote:
>> What would be the main reason for preferring fat clients? Is fat clients
>> more than just independent PCs with a complete OS which merely mount
>> their $HOMEs from some kind of NAS?
> In the context of LTSP, Fat Clients boot from the network and typically
> have no local storage(other than removable media), just like LTSP Thin
> Clients.
> The main advantage of LTSP Fat Clients, especially in today's media-rich
> environment, is that applications take full advantage of the client
> hardware. This is really important with displaying video, rendering on
> the local graphics hardware on the client.
That would be a major point for me, although video playback isn't at 
first place. But e.g. mere browser usage is far too slow on our thin 
clients, mainly because of slow graphics. This problem has become more 
and more severe over the last year(s).

> With thin clients, a video is downloaded on the server, rendered in
> software, and then sent over the network essentially uncompresed to the
> clients, which can saturate even a gigabit network quite fast, depending
> on the client resolution and how many clients are watching the video at
> once.
> LTSP Fat Clients will also be able to scale much better, hosting more
> clients on a single server, as the server is basically just a file
> server, serving up the OS and homedir.

Can I have several different OS kernels for different breeds of clients?

> It obviously requires more powerful clients, but even fairly old
> machines should work (e.g. core 2 with 2GB of ram, from 2009).

Yes, my laptop is an older IBM T model with just that configuration, and 
it still runs fine on current Linux. But I thought to buy more advanced 
clients, maybe zbox or something like that. (Do you happen to know if 
there are any glitches in graphics drivers for Linux on such machines?)

> At this point in time, I would recommend using LTSP Fat Clients by
> default, and only using LTSP Thin Clients as a last resort, when the
> client hardware really can't handle it.

You convinced me :)

During the next weeks, our institute will move, so there's not much time 
left for experiments. I will take all the old network with us and hope 
to get it running at the new place. But after that, I will set up a 
testing environment for a new configuration. Guess I will be back with 
more questions then ;)

I would really like to stay with LTSP because a server/client 
environment has many advantages over single PCs. But graphics has become 
a major issue for us.


Ltsp-discuss mailing list.   To un-subscribe, or change prefs, goto:
For additional LTSP help,   try #ltsp channel on irc.freenode.net

Reply via email to