[3002] in linux-net channel archive
Re: CPU at Workstations
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Mark Hahn)
Sat May 25 03:03:34 1996
From: Mark Hahn <hahn@neurocog.lrdc.pitt.edu>
To: louis@sacc.org.za (Louis Mandelstam)
Date: Fri, 24 May 1996 17:30:02 -0400 (EDT)
Cc: infoeng@trinidad.net, linux-net@vger.rutgers.edu
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.3.91.960523201433.6948E-100000@lh1.sacc.org.za> from "Louis Mandelstam" at May 23, 96 08:21:05 pm
> After looking around a bit I found it makes more sense to use proper
> hardware X stations - they can be cheaper than PCs, and are designed
> especially for this purpose so they are faster etc.
I'm curious how you came to this conclusion. I have experience
with HP X terminals, and they are uniformly slower and/or more costly
than PC alternatives. a P5/100 with a decent video card can easily
deliver 250k xstones for $2k or so. this is in the territory of relatively
high-end (dedicated) X terminals that go for more like $3-5k.
the decision comes down to whether you have the human resource to manage
the PC-based solution, since dedicated X terminals require almost no
support or maintenance, and are in general more reliable. the benefit
of using PCs is that you have massive choice in configurations, the cost
hardware is somewhat lower, and the machines are usable in their own right.
regards, mark hahn.
--
operator may differ from spokesperson. hahn@neurocog.lrdc.pitt.edu
http://neurocog.lrdc.pitt.edu/~hahn/
