With thin clients, for the most part always compare apples to apples. If you put thinstation 1 on a network drop to a vm session, test EVERY thin client on the same exact connection, session, and i/o pieces(monitor, keyboard, mouse).
Unfortunately, you are going to have to go by perception, so it's best to have several people test with you. Also, split the test up, test for a couple hours, then move on and test the next one and so on. Repeat day 2. Within a week, you'll know what is your best performer, if you use a couple additional people. Then you simply compare notes.
I have extensively used Wyse S10. I spent some time working on the Neoware c50 (not much with the e140). I have also a ChipPC JackPC and a ChipPC Xtreme PC in the lab but I haven't had enough time to play with them extrensively.
While other people have noticed a slight performance difference between the various devices being used I must admit I was not able to catch it up. Consider that I have tested it in the lab primarily to connect / disconnect and the most time I spent in the desktop was to check if the printers were installed correctly at logon so I am not talking about a deep analysis.
I think they are all very good devices. What I personally like about the S10 is it's capability of self-management. You can really do everything working with your DHCP/FTP server w/o the need to "push" updates/config from a central location to remote devices (it's always basically a "pull" that the device itself basically initiate at boot up).
I don't know what other thinks but to me a thin client is something that you deploy and forget. I am lean not to like devices that require yet another central management station for updates etc etc. That's why I don't personally like the other extreme (WinXPe).
Last but not least I would define the ChipPC JackPC fascinating and the Neoware devices rock-solid.
Having this said it is also important to validate the level of integration of these devices with the current connection brokers available in the market (assuming you want to use a connection broker).
1 person found this helpful
Agree with that, by coincidence we have had the exact set of devices under evaluation and after filtering to neoware and Wyse the decision is still on hold between them. I would recommend keep watching these two as they integrate nicely into the broker but feel the Wyse products provides the better management model (especially with the broker intgration).
These are changin rapidly though and both are developing quickly
Thanks for the responses from all. I just received the Chip PC evaluation units today, and we got the Wyse S10 late last week. As everyone has pointed out so far, the refresh rates on the S10 are noticeable compared to an RDP from a Fat Client to the VDI. Granted this was only after an initial setup and looking at them side by side. As it has been pointed out, I need to connect each system through the same network port for a real comparison yet too.
Oh, and just for additional input on the Chip PC models, so far we've been more than blown away by the company. We received our Jack PC and Extreme PC demo models earlier this week. Upon initial comparison to the Wyse S10 the video refresh rates are very noticeably better on the ChipPC models.
I will still be looking at a deeper performance comparison, including price and management software. However, I just wanted to point out that they shouldn't be discounted by any stretch when evaluating options. The desigin, engineering, performance, and not to mention the marketing that they put into their entire product is amazing to say the least. You'll see what I mean if you happen to get an evaluation kit from them, they incude everything but the kitchen sink in their package. There is even a complete VM setup to quickly establish an isolated configuration for testing the management software.
In any case, as you can tell my initial reactions are good, but there is still plenty of testing to be done. Just for the record, I do not work for the company or have any other reason to be this baised. They just did a great job with their product to get some great impressions from myself and my co-workers so far. I'm curious to know if anyone else has any additional input on Chip PC, and more importantly if anyone has found any big negatives with their devices?
>You'll see what I mean if you happen to get an evaluation kit from them,
>they incude everything but the kitchen sink in their package
Completely agreed on that.
>I'm curious to know if anyone else has any additional input on Chip PC,
>and more importantly if anyone has found any big negatives with their
Since you ask for negative aspects (there are of course good aspects as well... many of them you have mentioned) one of the weaknesses in my opinion they have is that they only have CE based devices. This has at least a couple of implications:
\- the cost is a bit higher than comparable Linux decices (because of the MS royalties).
\- CE is not integrated, as far as I know at least, with any sort of connection broker software. At least as of today Dec 6th 2006.
I definitely agree on the cost aspect. I haven't sat down with our vendor/reseller yet to get final numbers, but I already know these devices will lean a little higher on the scale.
As for broker integration, you are correct that there is no direct integration available as of this date. However, if using the Citrix Broker you could just create an autostart ICA connection. Granted as most of us already know this creates the ICA/RDP double jump right now. I'd much rather just go direct RDP until the Port ICA project becomes available. Just my $0.02.
Ohps... apparently I have just realized I forgot for a second about the Citrix so called VDI broker .....
Correct you would be able to use it on any CE device.
We would need to discuss whether or not the (current) Citrix solution is a viable general purpose connection broker but this would lead us to a loooong discussion ....
you actually forgot about the Virtual Access Suite from Provision Networks. As I posted before they have extended the RDP to give all the features from ICA without having to wait for PortICA. I am waiting for latency reducer - they are supposed to give a private pre-beta first week of January.
Agree with that, RDP's percieved limitations are usually a client restriction and can be addressed as are now readily available. RDP does present some limitations such as multimedia (audio and video sync lagg), USB device support and unidirectional audio.
Where this presents an issue is video conferencing, VOIP, online training etc. These limitations will be addressed and some sooner then later without tying to a specific highly engineered solution.
Remember RDP is an evolving protocol, that is somewhat hampered by the MS /Citrix relationship.
Techically there is no reason RDP can not support two-way audio, multimonitor etc, politically that may be a different story.
Each time they are said to be in the divorce court they refresh the agreement. The current agreement has a couple fo years left but with the new Terminal Services features in Longhorn the differences are getting scetchier. very true about the evolving protocol and we can expect MS to jump on the VDI bandwagon especially with Hypervisor around the corner.
As part of this the RDP limitations have to be lifted (multi monitor already has). RDP channels allow developers to come up with there own solutions to these issues or in some cases Network proxying such as with USB over the network or AV systems.
you actually forgot about the Virtual Access Suite from Provision Networks
Yeah .... I guess that after reading your 200 posts on Provision Network I have thought .... "perhaps I forgot Provision Network" ?
you actually forgot about the Virtual Access Suite
from Provision Networks
Yeah .... I guess that after reading your 200 posts
on Provision Network I have thought .... "perhaps I
forgot Provision Network" ?
Massimo, come on... 200 posts? You're way over exaggerating, it was more like 197 posts on Provision Network