Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!uflorida!haven!ncifcrf!nlm-mcs!usenet
From: usenet@nlm-mcs.arpa (usenet news poster)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: Single user vs. shared (was Re:
Keywords: X-terminals, process/task distribution
Message-ID: <11731@nlm-mcs.arpa>
Date: 21 Mar 90 04:58:48 GMT
References: <52817@lll-winken.LLNL.GOV> <76700181@p.cs.uiuc.edu> <19662@eerie.acsu.Buffalo.EDU>
Reply-To: states@tech.NLM.NIH.GOV (David States)
Organization: National Library of Medicine, Bethesda, Md.
Lines: 18

Lets view the net as an architecture for a moment.  What is the most 
cost effective way to provide computing/network access to a large number 
of people?  

More than a decade ago it was hardwired terminals and central minis. 
For the past decade or so, it has been local processors (micros) with 
loose network interconnections, or perhaps moderately coupled local 
processors (diskless workstations).  Now it looks like X-terminals.  
They give a reasonably good quality text and 2D graphics interface, 
don't flog the net like a diskless WS, and avoid the cost of duplicating 
disk drives etc. for each individual processor/desktop.

Question: Is this a temporary aberration or the shape of the future?

What will happen when the nets are 10x faster, disks 10x cheaper etc.

				David States, National Library of Medicine
				(usual disclaimer, views my own only)