Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 12:39:09 -0800 From: "Lee Mx" <lee_ver_mx@hotmail.com> To: dincht@securenym.net Cc: questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Changing a company from 100% Windows to 100% FreeBSD. Message-ID: <BAY8-F9xY5ksqQFxnPa0001a2f5@hotmail.com>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>From: "C. Ulrich" <dincht@securenym.net> >To: Lee Mx <lee_ver_mx@hotmail.com> >CC: questions@freebsd.org >Subject: Re: Changing a company from 100% Windows to 100% FreeBSD. >Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 15:48:24 -0500 > >On Mon, 2003-11-17 at 09:27, Lee Mx wrote: > > I am switching about 40 desktop's running different versions of > > windows over to freebsd. One of the primary requirements is > > OpenOffice-1.1 and I've always run it locally on my laptop. > > I'm considering running it over the LAN which would mean that > > I suppose that I would NFS mount the binary and do the network > > install. Could someone who has done this tell me if they > > recommend running it on the network or if it would be better to > > just install it on each of the 40 machines. This company and > > every user, uses Office daily, especially excel. > >I've never done this, but OpenOffice is such a large application that >this might not be such a swell idea. On my Athlon 750 with U2W SCSI, >OpenOffice 1.1 takes 20 seconds to load from the hard disk. I couldn't >guess how long it would take trying to pull it over the network, but I'm >sure it would be a lot longer. Also take into consideration the fact >that, unless your office is very well funded, you're probably don't have >the newest equipment. If this is the case, you could consider running >all the desktops as local thin clients. When a user logs in, they're >really just logging in remotely to an application server where all the >real work work is done. I would love to do that, but I have no idea where to start although Adrian was kind enough to send be a couple of links, I'm not sure I get it yet. If you have any other tips/links etc. they would sure be appreciated. > >Advantages: >- you only have to regularly maintain the application servers >- "outdated" hardware works just fine for the thin clients as everything >is run on the server >- users access their data and do their work from any machine (also >reduces "my machine" syndrome common in some workplaces) > Sounds great to me in my ignorance.:-) >Disadvantages: >- Allowing users to save things to floppy or CD could be slightly >problematic (ditto for playing video and sound) >- if all 40 desktops are in the same office/area, you'll probably have >to set up more than one application servers and work out a solution for >load-balancing and keeping them in sync >- if your users use large apps like OpenOffice, you might need pretty >hefty servers, especially in the memory department. However, it will >still be less memory than what would be required to run OpenOffice >locally on all 40 machines > >The client/server approach may not end up being the best solution for >your specific situation, but at least it's something to think about. >I've always heard good things from those who've implemented similar >solutions in their organizations. Thanks, Charles. It is certainly something to think about and test. lee _________________________________________________________________ Concerned that messages may bounce because your Hotmail account is over limit? Get Hotmail Extra Storage! http://join.msn.com/?PAGE=features/es
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?BAY8-F9xY5ksqQFxnPa0001a2f5>