> Regarding a Soft Ray... almost every potential customer I have talked to > has inquired about this feature. A Soft Ray introduces many issues > (e.g., protecting the client OS) and should not be necessary in the long > run. But for where the market is today, a Soft Ray would be a fabulous > transitional step. If I were to make a logical-sounding argument against the Soft-Ray, I wouldn't make it from a technical or customer-desire perspective. I'd make it from a business and integrated solutions perspective.
Sun is primarily a hardware company, selling hardware and providing software to boost hardware sales. (or so it seems) When SRS only ran on Solaris/SPARC, it appeared that SunRay thin clients were a way to sell big Sun server. Now that it's been ported to Linux, they must have made the case that either the clients were profitable enough, or that enough customers would use them with Sun's x86-compatable servers in Linux. (or just maybe software licensing revenue was worthwhile) If Sun released the Soft-Ray, how would they make any money (asside from SW licensing, which doesn't appear to be a business focus) off the thing? >From an integrated solutions / product differentiation perspective, the SunRay thin client "box" enables Sun to provide a working and integrated solution. With the Soft-Ray, how exactly would Sun's offering be any different (to the average customer) than any number of other "remote desktop software" solutions? Just my $0.02 -Derek _______________________________________________ SunRay-Users mailing list [email protected] http://www.filibeto.org/mailman/listinfo/sunray-users
