The IT sector is at once innovative and cyclical, throwing up new technologies that are updated variations on hoary old ones. Virtualisation is a good example. Server virtualisation has taken the industry by storm in recent years but IBM was already doing this with its mainframe platform in the 1960s. Similarly, in the early …
There are so many other options - but they all involve linux somewhere - which for a MS shop is a no-no.
Of course, linux is OAK on thier servers :-)
p.s. My desktop some 10+ years ago consisted of a IBM Power PC, a Sun3 and a SunServer. My main desktop was distributed across the three machines with dev applications and email etc runnning on the SunServer. The Sun3 provided the screen and the IBM provides the desktop manager.
I agree - this just seems to be a pro-MS fluff piece, explaining how W2k8 can satisfy all of a company's virtualisation needs. An opportunity missed to compare features/costs against VMWare, Citrix, and various other options.
You managed to get through the whole article without once mentioning Citrix.
Was it sponsored by Microsoft, or just hideously biased?
...isn't option 2 what *nix has been doing for decades?
Isn't having an OS (and related technologies) that is built from the ground-up the whole *nix paradigm?
How did you manage to write this whole article without mentioning that Windows is still trying to play catch-up in the multi-user environment and to have a hope of getting it work properly one still requires pretty beefy clients and third-arty software (e.g. Citrix).
Hell, drop the *nix back-end properly virutalised into a data centre and call it all "Cloud". Now you're computing like it's 1979 baby.
Thanks for the feedback fellows. It was commissioned and designed as a Microsoft and Windows-centric piece, so I wasn't aiming to look at *nix.
...it was (sort of) a puff piece then?
To ignore *nix and the fact that it has been doing exactly this for decades is short-sighted IMHO. I will agree that there is not always a *nix analogue for a Windows app, but if custom apps are being written/provided (or an acceptable analogue exists), then the ability of X-Server to blast them over the network to *very* thin clients cannot be ignored.
I will agree totally that this is not the answer in every case, but then neither is a desktop running Windows to merely fake being a dumb terminal.
I look forward to your reports (in the interest of balance) of alternative to the MS paradigm and then the pros and cons of each. :)
[Props for having the balls to reply too]
...I think I can do that :-) Thanks BY.
- iPad? More like iFAD: This is why Apple ran off to IBM
- +Analysis Microsoft: We're making ONE TRUE WINDOWS to rule us all
- Climate: 'An excuse for tax hikes', scientists 'don't know what they're talking about'
- Analysis Nadella: Apps must run on ALL WINDOWS – PCs, slabs and mobes
- Major problems beset UK ISP filth filters: But it's OK, nobody uses them