Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!rice!sun-spots-request
From: ames!ultra!shj@uunet.uu.net (Steve Jay)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.sun
Subject: Xterminals vs. worksations (was Re: avoiding obsolescence)
Keywords: Miscellaneous
Message-ID: <4038@brazos.Rice.edu>
Date: 21 Dec 89 02:46:18 GMT
Sender: root@rice.edu
Organization: Sun-Spots
Lines: 51
Approved: Sun-Spots@rice.edu
X-Refs:  Original: v8n208
X-Sun-Spots-Digest: Volume 8, Issue 230, message 11 of 13

In article <3319@brazos.Rice.edu> yar@basser.cs.su.oz.au writes:
>X-Sun-Spots-Digest: Volume 8, Issue 208, message 10 of 19
>
>I'd rather have 30 19" Xterminals
>backing onto a couple of Mips R6000 based systems each with 256Mb of
>memory than have 30 Sparcstations with each with the minimum 16Mb of
>memory.  It would sure make the management a lot easier, and it would
>eliminate the factor of 30 involved in any upgrade.

The economics and utility of workstations vs. server/terminals have
obviously changed in the last couple of years.  Sun's success has been
largely based on the marketplace's preference for workstations.  The new
class of servers & Xterminals that have become available recently make the
choice less clear.

In the veiwpoint of a system administrator, the server/terminal model is
certainly easier to manage.  However, I think until the economics favor
server/terminal installations by a very large margin (like 5 or 10 to
one), workstations will continue to be the prefered model for many
installations.  The reason is autonomy: who's in charge?

I have seen a lot of users who will put up with poorer performace, higher
cost, and more hassles for themselves, just so they can retain control
over their own computer system.  I spent a long time working for a
computer center at a large research university, and I was astounded by the
level of anonmosity toward the computer center, regardless of the quality
& cost of the services provided.  I have talked to enough folks from other
installations to know that this is almost universal...nobody loves the
computer center.  With a central facility, you just can't get away from
the issues of how the central resource is divided among the users.  The
administrative hassles of dealing with a central facility are always
considered much worse than the hassles of running your own machine.  I
think this is almost entirely an issue of who controls it.  My own machine
may be a mess, but it's MY mess, and it's none of your business.

The desire for local/personal control is overwhelming.  I've seen
customers run programs for a week straight on their own PC's, rather than
set up a 10 minute run on a central machine.  I think this same desire was
largely responsible for the tremendous success of the VAX class machines,
which allowed local (departmental) control, and then the even larger
success of PC's & workstations (personal control).

So, I think that even when economics and functionality favor a
server/terminal configuration, autonomous workstations (with networking to
the rest of the world), will continue to win in the marketplace.

Steve Jay
Ultra Network Technologies	Domain: shj@ultra.com
101 Dagget Drive		Internet: ultra!shj@ames.arc.nasa.gov
San Jose, CA  95134		uucp:  ...ames!ultra!shj
(408) 922-0100