Re: Recomendation for LTSP thin clients
Marc Stephan Nkouly <[email protected]> Wed, 6 Aug 2014 14:35:16 +0100
| Newsgroups | gmane.linux.redhat.k12osn |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CANLQgebGxANQ2oADTgvKimBiZpfeCtnUug1svpwDmg5JY0YK_w@mail.gmail.com> |
Please i wish to know if the nettop can work as a stand alone computer ??? On Aug 6, 2014 10:19 AM, "Radek Bursztynowski" <[email protected]> wrote: > Brian, > > Let me share my experience. Perhaps I don't fit exactly your question, but > there is my experience: > > Regarding 1. > It depends on what you use thin client. If you execute any application on > yout thin client locally (like a fat client) thin client performance is > essential. If not, older machines used as a thin client are fine. I use > d510 NetTop (with 1 GB of memory) > http://www.alibaba.com/showroom/nettop-d510.html, and I can say that it > is optimal machine for K12Linux. I bought theses NetTops with no internal > HDD. From my poing of view D510 NetTop with K12Linux on CentOS 6.5 x86_64 > servrer is optimal solution. NetTop 510 price was $178 including VAT. I > prefere NetTops because owing to the NetTop with no HDD I can avoid any > operating system license payment. Buying thin client machine you pay for OS > placed in flash memory. > Regarding terminal memory my tests showed that d510 machine with activated > 5 consoles and 5 users logged in and opened Fireox, Libre/Microsoft Office > (Ctrl+Alt+F1 ... Ctrl+Alt+F5 - 2xLDM, 1xXDMCP 1xxfreerdp and 1xrdesktop) > used no more than 500 MB of memory. So, for standard office user terminal > equipped with 1 GB of memory is OK. > > Regarding 2. > My experience says that no. K12Linux thin client images don't support all > video cards with full resolution (CentOS and Fedora). You can try to add to > the thin client image proper driver/module and to solve this problem (I > made it for SIS chipset, but I failed with GeForce). Very important is NIC > too. You shoul check is CentOS/Fedora/LTSP support terminal NIC. > > Regarding 3. > I use x86_64 servers (CentOS 6.5) and all my LTSP thin clients runs using > x86 images and I don't see real reasons to change it (I don't use as a LTSP > terminals Intel i3/i5/i7/Xeon machines). LTSP server servs thin image to > the terminal and thin client binaries runs on the terminal. So, if thin > client image offers the protocols we are at home. Let me add that I tested > debian 7 LTSP thin client image with K12Linux server and I can say that > terminal works. I admit that I dont't tested all functionality (for example > multimedia) with debian 7 thin client image, but in general - it works. > > Best regards, > Radek > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Brian Fristensky" <[email protected]> > Sent: Wed, 8/6/2014 1:08am > To: "Support list for open source software in schools." <[email protected] > > > Subject: [K12OSN] Recomendation for LTSP thin clients > > I need to replace my Diskless Workstations T1420 thin client because the > Eden > processor is no longer supported ie. will not boot with RHEL 6.5. > > 1. I am considering going with a Diskless Workstations 1600 or 1700, which > uses > an N270 Atom processor, which I would assume is still supported, if they're > advertising it. I am a little hesitant to go with this processor, since it > was > released in 2008. It seems likely that support for such an old processor > will be > dropped in the near future. > > Are there other thin client options to consider? This is a single seat thin > client at home, so price is not really an object. What I am more > interested in > is ease of management and performance. > > 2. Should I assume that any thin client hardware that supports PXE boot > will > work with LTSP (obsolescence aside?) > > 3. My server is a 64-bit machine running RHEL6.5 (Essentially Centos6.5). > Would > I be correct in assuming that it would be better to have a 64-bit thin > client? > As far as I can tell from the Diskless Workstations web sites, their Atom > processors are 32-bit. I would expect that if I did want to run some > applications as local applications, having a 64-bit TC would be simpler. As > well, 32-bit processors are, let's face it, so 1990's. I would expect a > 64-bit > processor to be less subject to the fate of obsolescence that my current TC > succumbed to. > > Suggestions for thin clients that are known to work with LTSP, and use > recent > processors, would be greatly appreciated. > > > Brian > > _______________________________________________ > K12OSN mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn > For more info see <http://www.k12os.org>; > > _______________________________________________ > K12OSN mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn > For more info see <http://www.k12os.org> > _______________________________________________ K12OSN mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn For more info see <http://www.k12os.org>