[THIN] Betr.: Re: WYSE vs. NeoWare
- From: "Michel Roth" <m.roth@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2005 09:37:56 +0100
We had been running Neoware Capios over at a site for about two years, when
the complaints starting pouring in. We were able to pinpoint the Neoware
problems to very poor video performance. We then tested several Thin
Clients (IGEL, Newer Neoware's, CHIPPC, Wyse). For us the great winner was
the Wyse 1125 SE. This thin client runs a custom UNIX like OS called Blazer
UNIX. It boots in 8 (!) seconds. Videoperformance is very good. The best
we've seen. Even with devices at twice the price.
I agreee that the management tool for Wyse thin client is a bit....
clunky... but it does the job. Remember this is the free variant. If you
choose to deploy WinCE Wyse Thin Clients then you can use their other
management tool, Rapport. If I remember correctly there's a payed version
as well as a free version.
In your initial post you mentioned that you're using it for deploying just
one app. If you require no support for USB Sticks, Anti-RSI mouses or
Portable DVD Burners on your thin client then I would go with Wyse. As for
the FTP server. Any FTP server will do. If you have a w2k box running then
just install on that.
Note 1: I know that the Neoware management software does not require a ftp
server.
Note 2: Another feature I like about the Wyse 1125 SE is that it provides a
IT professional with enough small troubleshooting tools on the thin client
itself.
HTH,
M.Roth
Network Manager
Thanks for all of the great responses! I really appreciate it.
I know that the WYSE terminals require an FTP server to manage and lock
down
the clients. Is it similar with NeoWare or is done a different way? I'm
going to call and get some eval units.
Thanks again...
Brian
|---------+---------------------------->
| | "Lich, Brian M" |
| | <blich@xxxxxxxxx>|
| | Verzonden door: |
| | thin-bounce@freel|
| | ists.org |
| | |
| | |
| | 23-02-05 02:20 |
| | Antwoord a.u.b. |
| | aan thin |
| | |
|---------+---------------------------->
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Aan: <thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
|
| cc:
|
|Onderwerp: [THIN] Re: WYSE vs. NeoWare
|
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
Thanks for all of the great responses! I really appreciate it.
I know that the WYSE terminals require an FTP server to manage and lock
down
the clients. Is it similar with NeoWare or is done a different way? I'm
going to call and get some eval units.
Thanks again...
Brian
-----Original Message-----
From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf
Of Greg Reese
Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2005 6:19 PM
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [THIN] Re: WYSE vs. NeoWare
i'll second the slow boot times. We just left ours on all the time
with the energy saver set to ten minutes.
One thing on the Neoware units that we liked is that they took a
normal power cord. No fooling with power bricks or anything like
that. It was maddening with Wyse to trouble shoot the terminal, then
troubleshoot the power brick and swap one from a working unit to
another unit etc, etc.
You can also use the ezremote manager software and they will update
and configure themselves. We would have new units drop shipped to our
remote locations and the users would just plug them in, turn them on,
and they would auto-configure, reboot, and go directly to the login
screen. this ability was not an extra cost with Neoware. the
software is a free download and the terminals are configured at the
factory to work with it if it is there.
On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 09:31:27 +1100, Nick Crisp
<ncrisp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I went with neoware after attempting to trial wyse... The trial winterm
> arrived in lockdown mode and so after some fiddling and head scratching I
> finally figured this out and sent it back and requested a replacement.
While
> waiting on a replacement winterm I trialled a capio from neoware and
> everything was nice and easy, so I placed the order. Then about two
months
> later Wyse rang up and told me my trial machine was well overdue... I
> enjoyed sending them proof of delivery and explaining that they still
hadnt
> sent me a replacement trial machine and I had since gone with Neoware.
> Unfortunately though after the implemantation complaints came from users
> that the screen refresh rates on the capios were slow when compared to
the
> old celeron 600s runing RDP on Win2k that they were replacing. (only a
> problem for counter staff)
> They are also a bit slower to boot than winterms
> But management was a breeze
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf
> Of Greg Reese
> Sent: Wednesday, 23 February 2005 7:39 AM
> To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [THIN] Re: WYSE vs. NeoWare
>
> my company ran Wyse for several years and had nothing but problems.
> We finally bit the bullet and tosssed them all in favor of Neoware.
> They have been great. The support has been good to. The biggest factor
in
> choosing a thin client is the management software. If you don't have
good
> software to manage and deploy the units, then you will be wasting your
time.
> Neoware has good management tools and they are compatible with third
party
> tools like Altiris. Wyse has some different things, I really don't know
> too much about it these days but I am sure someone on this list can share
> their experience.
>
> Both companies will send you a demo unit and provide support to check
them
> out. I recommend you put them head to head and see which one comes out
on
> top for you.
>
> Greg
>
> On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 14:35:22 -0500, Lich, Brian M <blich@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
> > Hello:
> >
> > I am new to Citrix and the whole thin client world. My organization
> > is looking at deploying a patient management system via Citrix. The
> > app is in pilot now and performing very well in the Citrix farm.
> >
> > Now that the application is going, I've been asked to purchase some
> > thin clients. I was looking at either a WYSE client or NeoWare. The
> > problem that I have with WYSE is that it communicates via an FTP
> > server, which in my organization is frowned upon. So, I started to
> > look into a NeoWare solution.
> >
> > What are you thoughts on both of these products (or any other thin
> clients)?
> > The ability to lock down the systems so that not just any user can
> > change the settings is important. The ability to remotely upgrade the
> > firmware would be nice. I think that both of the clients mentioned
> > above can do this. However, I cannot use FTP as the means of
> communication.
> >
> > How does NeoWare handle the remote firmware updating and security
> settings?
> >
> > Thanks in advance...
> > Brian
> >
> >
> >
> ********************************************************
> This Weeks Sponsor: RTO Software TScale
> TScale provides a cost-effective way to improve performance, capacity and
> stability for thin-client servers like Citrix MetaFrame or Microsoft
> Terminal Services running Windows NT, 2000 or 2003.
> http://www.rtosoft.com/enter.asp?id=296
> **********************************************************
> Useful Thin Client Computing Links are available at:
> http://thin.net/links.cfm
> ThinWiki community - Excellent SBC Search Capabilities!
> http://www.thinwiki.com
> ***********************************************************
> For Archives, to Unsubscribe, Subscribe or set Digest or Vacation mode
use
> the below link:
> http://thin.net/citrixlist.cfm
>
> ********************************************************
> This Weeks Sponsor: RTO Software TScale
> TScale provides a cost-effective way to improve performance, capacity and
stability for thin-client servers like Citrix MetaFrame or Microsoft
Terminal Services running Windows NT, 2000 or 2003.
> http://www.rtosoft.com/enter.asp?id=296
> **********************************************************
> Useful Thin Client Computing Links are available at:
> http://thin.net/links.cfm
> ThinWiki community - Excellent SBC Search Capabilities!
> http://www.thinwiki.com
> ***********************************************************
> For Archives, to Unsubscribe, Subscribe or
> set Digest or Vacation mode use the below link:
> http://thin.net/citrixlist.cfm
>
********************************************************
This Weeks Sponsor: RTO Software TScale
TScale provides a cost-effective way to improve performance, capacity and
stability for thin-client servers like Citrix MetaFrame or Microsoft
Terminal Services running Windows NT, 2000 or 2003.
http://www.rtosoft.com/enter.asp?id=296
**********************************************************
Useful Thin Client Computing Links are available at:
http://thin.net/links.cfm
ThinWiki community - Excellent SBC Search Capabilities!
http://www.thinwiki.com
***********************************************************
For Archives, to Unsubscribe, Subscribe or
set Digest or Vacation mode use the below link:
http://thin.net/citrixlist.cfm
********************************************************
This Weeks Sponsor: RTO Software TScale
TScale provides a cost-effective way to improve performance, capacity and
stability for thin-client servers like Citrix MetaFrame or Microsoft Terminal
Services running Windows NT, 2000 or 2003.
http://www.rtosoft.com/enter.asp?id=296
**********************************************************
Useful Thin Client Computing Links are available at:
http://thin.net/links.cfm
ThinWiki community - Excellent SBC Search Capabilities!
http://www.thinwiki.com
***********************************************************
For Archives, to Unsubscribe, Subscribe or
set Digest or Vacation mode use the below link:
http://thin.net/citrixlist.cfm
Other related posts:
- » [THIN] Betr.: Re: WYSE vs. NeoWare
