[THIN] Re: SATA drives
- From: "Joe Shonk" <joe.shonk@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2006 08:41:21 -0700
Mainly because they don't want to pay and absobent amount of money for only
a few features they can uses. Sales people hate it when I say that, but
they keep pounding vs budget. Some smaller companies simply can't afford
the bluesky solution.
Citrix, on the other hand did come out with AE, which is an excellent
product to pitch to those TS only shops.
Much like you can compare SCSI, SATA and Fibre Channel.... SATA=AE,
SCSI=PS Advanced, FC or Solid State=PS Enterprise.
If SCSI speed is that important for TS, why are we not use more SAN
connected TSes or Solid State solutions ? Given that SATA (w/ Raid
controller and NCQ) can provide decent speeds. Enough that you average user
will not notice. Perhaps you will not be able to scale up as much as SCSI,
but with todays servers pushing the limit of a 32 bit OS you're more likely
to hit a memory bottleneck. Yes, 64-bit is out but not without its
problems.
Basically it all comes down to economy of scale. Do you scale up or out?
Joe
On 10/3/06, Jim Kerr <jim@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Actually I see more and more companies using TS now days.
----- Original Message -----
From: "richard van beers" <richard.van.beers@xxxxxxxxx>
To: <thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, October 03, 2006 6:39 AM
Subject: [THIN] Re: SATA drives
> Everyone has assholes and opinions.
>
> Citrix uses less bw than TS, clearly in a thin client env. TS RDP is
> teh bottleneck.
>
> So there is no use for plain TS systems?
>
> Of course there is!
>
> If I need a system to supply 10 users with ms office, and they need it
> on the cheap, a single proc system with 1 gb, and a mirrored sata
> drive is "good enough" and will save me 100's on scsi.
>
> so, there. :)
>
> On 10/3/06, Andrew Wood <andrew.wood@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> >"There might be times when a *subpar* system is "good enough". Often,
>> actually. "
>>
>> I think that's short sighted and shooting yourself in the foot before
you
>> even get off the ground
>>
>> ;)
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
>> Behalf
>> Of richard van beers
>> Sent: 03 October 2006 09:38
>> To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Subject: [THIN] Re: SATA drives
>>
>> > I'm sorry there is no good arguement for going SATA over SCSI in a TS
>> > environment. It's short sighted and your shooting yourself in the
>> > foot before you even get off the ground.
>>
>>
>> Oh cool! A strong opinion and I disagree! (Just slightly)
>>
>> There might be times when a subpar system is "good enough". Often,
>> actually.
>> ************************************************
>> For Archives, RSS, to Unsubscribe, Subscribe or set Digest or Vacation
>> mode
>> use the below link:
>> //www.freelists.org/list/thin
>> ************************************************
>>
>> ************************************************
>> For Archives, RSS, to Unsubscribe, Subscribe or
>> set Digest or Vacation mode use the below link:
>> //www.freelists.org/list/thin
>> ************************************************
>>
> ************************************************
> For Archives, RSS, to Unsubscribe, Subscribe or set Digest or Vacation
> mode use the below link:
> //www.freelists.org/list/thin
> ************************************************
>
>
************************************************
For Archives, RSS, to Unsubscribe, Subscribe or
set Digest or Vacation mode use the below link:
//www.freelists.org/list/thin
************************************************
Other related posts:
