Linux offers an excellent alternative for businesses looking for something different in an OS. However, Linux with all of its components and options installed can be a massive resource hog. Enter “thin clients,” pared-down Linux installations, which offer a streamlined OS for lighter system usage.
Linux Thin Clients: The Server
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
Actually I’m only 1/2 kidding….
SUN’s SunRAY platform (with a LINUX or Solaris back-end-server) is an interesting approach to thin-clients.
The hardware is slick (and cheap if you have an existing monitor) and ontop of that there is no “local instance” to maintain.
The SunRAYS seem a little different from other thin-client offerings that either run some form of embedded windows-XP with the RDP components active, or perhaps an embedded LINUX solution. Either way, these “fairly-thin” solutions are somewhat susceptible to viruses, etc. and still need some amount of maintenance. (simply because they ARE STILL running an OS, eventhough its “appliance style”).
The SunRAY thin-client is more of an “ultra-thin” client in that it doesn’t run WINDOWS or LINUX under the covers, rather some 300k worth of firmware, essentiall a fairly basic IP-stack, and some “remote-screen” code. Pretty slick, pretty thin… (all the intelligence is out on the server.)
For those like like LINUX, use a LINUX back-end, for those that like Solaris, use a solaris backend…. [ solaris x86 doesn’t work yet, so lets not start the relegious wars just yet… ] and for those that like/need windows, there are some CITRIX/tarentella solutions that also seem to work pretty well.
worth a closer look for those who are interested in a “buy not build”/supported solution.
my 2 cents worth…
What makes you think there are no ‘buy not build’ commercial thin client distributions built on linux? Do your homework…
This is going to be big. I really like the approach of using either solaris or linux. The best part is that the end users dont know which OS it is. Very ideal for users that dont care what OS they are running on and need to use only certain apps for their work, such as call centers, support teams etc. very groovy!
LTSP is good but I prefer Thinstation (http://thinstation.sourceforge.net) because it doesn’t need a NFS server. The client linux filesystem is loaded to RAM using tftp.
It requires clients with more RAM than LTSP solution but in my experiences a Pentium 1xx with only 32MB of RAM is sufficient for decent performance. LTSP can work with worser machines, like Pentium 1xxx 16MB RAM clients and 486s.
Where does Stateless Linux (http://fedora.redhat.com/projects/stateless/)stack up agaist all this, Isn’t it suppose to be inbetween thin/thick client? When it was announced I know it was pretty big news at the time and had a few people applauding.
This is going to be big.
What?! SunRay has been around for years. If it isn’t big now it probably never will be.
The SunRAY thin-client is more of an “ultra-thin” client in that it doesn’t run WINDOWS or LINUX under the covers, rather some 300k worth of firmware, essentiall a fairly basic IP-stack, and some “remote-screen” code. Pretty slick, pretty thin… (all the intelligence is out on the server.)
Oh, and Sun tried all this with JavaStations and NCs. Guess what? They sucked like a very, very strong vacuum cleaner. I wouldn’t say you could get any seriously sized applications across there.
a friend of mine worked at sun for 5 years in the educational department. she didn’t know much about computers but would constantly joke about how bad sunray was and how often it went down. evidently, sun couldn’t even maintain there own product internally
one of the problem with sunrays is that they’ve been around in some form or another for about 9/10 years. (really… look it up!)
Mind you the original ones were a disaster! Particularly because they just sucked (features, stability, performance, etc.), and partially since most people were running 10-base-T networks IF they were lucky. (token ring if they weren’t 🙁
The other problem the 10-year-old implementations had was that the SERVER-OS/hardware wasn’t quite advanced enough to provide a solid high-performance remote desktop. (using gnome/kde/enlightenment, etc. even if it existed…. CDE…. gross…)
obviously things are different now… (but why let those facts get in the way of the mud-throwing 🙂
—
It would appear that several folks here are throwing FUD around by mentioning limitations of the older sunray / javastation nightmares… stuff that is simply no longer true… [ and hasn’t been for years… ]
sure there are issues (as with anything)…. but why not list the valid ones instead? [ wait, that may actually require some thought and hands-on experience… ]
(guys, if you haven’t actually tried something, raise concerns, evoke thought/conversation, but don’t just make stuff up????)
sadly this un-informed fud-throwing is happening more and more here… This used to be an informative forum… who knows what it is now…
Is SunRay the thin client solution that streamed the desktop to the clients as a video? I know one company had that, and it would basically kill the server if too many people were making a lot of changes to their desktops at the same time. Using a terminal to save on hardware is almost pointless these days. Lets face it, you can get a machine capable of running linux fine for what a terminal would cost. Course, it still rocks for manageability and convenience. No point in putting all the processing on the server when hardware is so cheap though.
> a friend of mine worked at sun for 5 years in the educational department. she didn’t know much about computers but would constantly joke about how bad sunray was and how often it went down. evidently, sun couldn’t even maintain there own product internally
I’m not sure what friend told youd this story (imaginary friends???). I’ve been working for Sun for a few years already and I’m yet to see a single instance of Sun Ray network failing (that is including all the upgrades that we had). SunRay servers are generally clustered for high availability, so there is a very good degree of protection from pretty much any sort of failure. Mind you Sun employs SunRay to provide desktops to 30,000+ employess and I can attest that they work pretty much flawlessly. Without any bias toward my employer I won’t blink saying that SunRay is the absolute best thin-client technology on the market.
I work in a DataCenter. We have SunRay rolled out in our NOC and it is extremely reliable. As [email protected] mentions above, most SunRay servers are clustered for HA (and if it isn’t, I would seriously question your company’s IT dept) and they are pretty fast for what it is aimed to be. Sun, for instance, does not claim that the SunRays can replace CAD/CAM/CA workstations, nor do they claim that 3D modeling workstations can be replaced. However, for what it was designed, it does an outstanding job.
Moving among different client terminals is a snap. Take your card with you, and your sessions are automagically in front of you at any terminal.
sjk
The article mention’s the problem of some business’s holding on to older hardware and not being able to run kde, or gnome. So how do thin clients get around this exactly?
I mean it sounds neat having modest machines that don’t even necessarily require a harddrive, but how do thin clients get around this? The ram, cpu requirements are still pretty much the same.
Now are thin clients just basically like vnc just sending the client sucessive screenshots of the gui? And if this is the case what kind of machine does one need to have as the server for say 20-30 people?
Maybe if someone knows of another article explaining thin client tech from a higher level instead of getting down and dirty in this article.
I mean it sounds neat having modest machines that don’t even necessarily require a harddrive, but how do thin clients get around this? The ram, cpu requirements are still pretty much the same.
Actually, no. The requirements are much less, because all the thin client really has to do is run X. The programs run on the server, and the visual output is piped to the thin client (while keyboard and mouse input go from the thin client to the server).
Now are thin clients just basically like vnc just sending the client sucessive screenshots of the gui?
Kind of, but not quite. Over 100MBit ethernet it’s very workable, with very little lag – on 1GBit ethernet it’s as if you were working right on the server.
And if this is the case what kind of machine does one need to have as the server for say 20-30 people?
Depends if they all log in at the same time! 🙂 Of course, this isn’t usable for multimedia or games, but for office or educative purposes it can be quite useful…
Where I work, we’re rolling out a linux-based thin client solution using a standard (if somewhat beefed-up) x86 PC as the server – rack mounted. The clients are either trimmed down Linux installs capable only of running X, or actual linux-based thin clients courtesy of WYSE. (http://www.wyse.com/).
Also PXES is pretty nice: http://pxes.sourceforge.net/
I’m not sure what friend told youd this story (imaginary friends???). I’ve been working for Sun for a few years already and I’m yet to see a single instance of Sun Ray network failing (that is including all the upgrades that we had).
No, that’s not what was written. His/her friend didn’t say that it failed, just that it absolutely sucked in terms of getting any work done.
I’m not really interested in how well it work inside Sun. The fact is that SunRay, and those awful JavaStations and NCs are just not good enough to get any work done. By that I mean simple desktop tasks, such as browsing and office work.
Sun’s stuff on this front has sucked for years, so obviously we’re all imaginary.
David here is a good example…. (a little knowledge is dangerous…)
He is partially right in that javastations, and NCs sucked… badly…. (real bad)…. about 6-8 years ago. Actually he is completely right in that aspect…
What he doesn’t mention is that he has NO EXPERIENCE with producs say…. 2 years old or newer. [ note he keeps mentioning JavaStations, and NCs…. sunrays are about 3 generations past that… and sun has smartly droppped the name javastation…. ooh boy did those suck…. ]
Simple desktop tasks like surfing and office work…. Say with things like firefox and open/star-office… People are currently using sunrays for that… and guess what, that is an area where they work great! same with call-centers, NOCS, etc. (cad-stations, gaming, and video-work… not so much…. but would any thin-client?)
I you don’t agree that simple surfing and office-work can be done with these thin-clients, that fine, but since (if you select the option) its the *same* LINUX desktop you’d get on a stand-alone LINUX-system, then I guess you’re saying that a LINUX desktop-machine also sucks… and isn’t usable for surfing and simple office work….
Fine, say that…. but don’t blame it on sunrays, or the linux/solaris (gnome & friends) desktop… blame it on that you’re a microsoft user… catch up on current technology, then make your comments…
David here is a good example…. (a little knowledge is dangerous…)
Yes, it certainly is
.
Reverse psychology: you call it cruft because you know it’s true – or at least have some idea that it is.
What he doesn’t mention is that he has NO EXPERIENCE with producs say…. 2 years old or newer. [ note he keeps mentioning JavaStations, and NCs…. sunrays are about 3 generations past that… and sun has smartly droppped the name javastation…. ooh boy did those suck…. ]
What makes you think I haven’t? This isn’t a fanboy rant unfortunately, and it makes no difference what has been brought out in the last couple of years – they’re still no good. A classic comment when you mention anything like this is “Oh, try something released by Sun in the last five minutes”. Err, no because it’s still the same technology and the same principle except with even larger applications like Mozilla and Star Office.
Simple desktop tasks like surfing and office work…. Say with things like firefox and open/star-office… People are currently using sunrays for that… and guess what, that is an area where they work great!
You try and get even a few hundred people using the kind of hardware server-side set up that the vast majority of companies have. Even with all the will (bandwidth and servers) in the world you aren’t going to get anything done without users complaining like hell on the first day of it going live.
And applications the size of Firefox and Star Office (which are huge), used by several hundred to several thousand users with that kind of set up? Don’t make me laugh.
Fine, say that…. but don’t blame it on sunrays, or the linux/solaris (gnome & friends) desktop…
You need efficient desktops and applications to make this really work, and even then you’re on the edge.
As I’ve said before, Sun has tried to sell this set up to people before and it simply isn’t up to the job – then and now. The reason why they continue to push it is the really vain hope that you’ll spend more money than sense on a whole bank of Sun servers that are more expensive to buy and maintain than a even fat client approach, or a better compromise solution such as stateless Linux.
Get real Sun, it isn’t going to happen.
blame it on that you’re a microsoft user… catch up on current technology, then make your comments…
Current technology? What makes you think thin-client is current? Nope, I’m not a Microsoft user (not exclusively anyway) but a totally thin-client approach isn’t practical, nor do I like Windows’ fat client approach.
The best approach is to have a manageable way of centralising a user’s settings and files and being able to centrally manage and distribute applications. Anyone who can figure out a unified way of doing that seemlessly and with a set of tools that makes it all manageable will be well into the black. However, that’s obviously not going to be Sun.