This sounds similar to what SUN was touted a couple of years ago as
jini. Plugable autonomous devices and code.

http://wwws.sun.com/software/jini/

Stu

On Wed, 2002-11-13 at 22:49, Richard Neal wrote:
> To be honest my personally thoughts are in the long run the Desktop is a
> dead man walking device this became more obvious as I read up on new
> technologies taking shape, for example  IPv6 and the network desktop.
> For those not in the know one of the advantages of IPv6 over IPv4 is
> that suddenly you have this massive increase in IP numbers,I think it
> works out at about 1000 IP numbers per square meter of the Planet Earths
> surface though Im sure Ive been quoted a higher number.
> 
> So how does this change the game, well for starters no need for IRQ's in
> computers for starters every device can now have it's own IP number,
> your mouse your hardisk even your display (wherever and whatever it is)
> can now become a networked device.When you reach this stage why do you
> ask yourself do I need a box at all.I can just go out an buy this small
> modular devices and if I need more storage I just go and buy another
> storage module same with the CPU.
> 
> Then add to this mix wireless mobility and you start to see some serious
> question marks on the logic of a Desktop PC.
> 
> So what will replace it you might say.....well not one device but many,
> imagine a whole office full of generic small cheap devices all
> communicating to each other with no real need for a desktop due to some
> complex but simple rules, think of the ant and how stupid it is as an
> individual then think about how a group of these creatures can build
> extremely complex structures then you might just be starting to get a
> glimpse of what will kill the desktop.
> 
> As for exporting from a central server services, this is also a dead
> technology. When you centralize anything you restrict the distribution
> of information through the network also this promotes network lag ie we
> all have been victim of not enough bandwidth to a service during a busy
> period due to to over centralization of said service. Then we end up in
> this stupid cycle of making the centralized system bigger and more
> bloated and more inefficient .. did someone say XP.
> 
> To me the next great step is being able to buy a small generic device
> walk over to my fridge/tv/microwave and registering it with my local
> home network as a recognized device no stuffing around with drivers no
> going "ooh I better update to the next version of OS annoying as hell
> ver4.2" (personally I think in the long run the OS is a dead duck but
> thats another story)the device just works and part of buying a new
> device is you also get a partial firmware update to the network.
> 
> Yes there will be some need of major and minor device categories and
> layering of what is priority data and what is background in the network
> but centralization is dead.
> 
> Regards
> 
> Richard Neal
> 
> On Wed, 2002-11-13 at 08:21, Visser, Martin (Sydney) wrote:
> > That reminds me...
> > 
> > X-Windows of course was design to have the client application running on
> > a central server(s), with the X-server (the display terminal) doing the
> > actual display of the application's windows and interfacing with
> > keyboard/mouse. (Similar to the say Windows Terminal Services / Citrix
> > Metaframe)
> > 
> > Now that *nix is easily deployed to *every* desktop via Linux, this type
> > of setup I imagine is going away. With the available CPU on each desktop
> > it makes sense from a purely performance reason to deploy the app right
> > on the desktop. 
> > 
> > That being said, as most Windows sysadmins would say, keeping each
> > desktop locked down and under control can prove difficult. Hence the
> > move to Windows Terminal Services in many environments.
> > 
> > I was just wondering whether medium to large Linux-only shops have
> > looked at/or have deployed Linux using a tradition X-Windows model. That
> > is, put a minimal Linux install on each desktop, and run the app on the
> > server. This way each Linux desktop can be "locked down" , and the
> > desktop environment can be more easily controlled centrally. For
> > instance upgrading Star Office is *simply* a matter of upgrading SO on
> > the server farm, rather than having to push it out to each desktop. It
> > also means that you don't need a 2GHz CPU and 60GB hard disk on each
> > desktop, just something with a good network interface and a decent
> > CPU/Graphics chip combo to drive the screen. (Or even a fixed config
> > X-terminal but I haven't seen these for ages)
> > 
> > What is the current consensus?
> > 
> > Martin Visser
> > Network Consultant
> > Technology & Infrastructure - Consulting & Integration
> > HP Services
> > 
> > 3 Richardson Place
> > North Ryde, Sydney NSW 2113, Australia
> > Phone *: +61-2-9022-1670    Mobile *: +61-411-254-513
> >    Fax 7: +61-2-9022-1800     E-mail * : martin.visserAThp.com
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Ken Foskey [mailto:foskey@;optushome.com.au] 
> > Sent: Wednesday, 13 November 2002 7:59 AM
> > To: slug
> > Subject: Re: [SLUG] dishing up star office
> > 
> > 
> > On Wed, 2002-11-13 at 10:51, mick wrote:
> > > Hi all,
> > > 
> > > I was wondering if it where possible to have a central server for star
> > 
> > > office
> > > and have it start up at boot with the server and then be accesible to
> > network 
> > > uses.
> > > 
> > > I have Mandrake 9.0 on the server and another machine and redhat 7.3 
> > > on a
> > > third.  The server does the dhcp thing for internet sharing.
> > 
> > You can run gdm with xdcmp enabled gdm-config.   Then you can run the
> > whole thing off the second box by
> > 
> > X -query xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx  (Ip address or name in hosts)
> > 
> > or 
> > 
> > X -broadcast
> > 
> > I do this with some crappy computers and one decent server.
> > 
> > KenF
> > 
> > -- 
> > SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group - http://slug.org.au/
> > More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug
> > -- 
> > SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group - http://slug.org.au/
> > More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug
> -- 
> ********************************************************************
> * Hey if you're going to get mad at me every time I do something   *
> * stupid, then I guess I'll just have to stop doing stupid things! *
> ********************************************************************  
> 
> -- 
> SLUG - Sydney Linux User Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/
> More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug-chat


-- 
SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group - http://slug.org.au/
More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug

Reply via email to