SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Technology Stocks : INPR - Inprise to Borland (BORL)

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: David R who wrote (4566)2/16/2000 12:08:00 AM
From: David Miller   of 5102
 
Thin client vs PC: Seconds out, Round 5

Browser-based computing sits equally well on a PC as it does on a thin client, i.e. you don't have to go out and buy a thin client to enjoy browser-based computing. This is not an "either/or" world. Fat and thin can co-reside, which makes any change subtle and continuous rather than instantaneous and discontinuous. 100% of the PC-owning population could already be working in thin-client applications - which would be powerful support for Tom C's contention - but by equating thin client with a particular hardware configuration, you miss the point.

From my own narrow world view, there is an increasing demand for thin client (browser-based) applications, and a complete drying-up of demand for applications that insist upon a fat client configuration. To some, this makes application sense (a browser metaphor is more appropriate than Windows), to some it makes commercial sense (the license cost has in some cases already become the single greatest dollar component of the machine), to some it is a performance issue (the latency of Windows is greater than that of the network - particularly for intranet apps), and to some it makes religious sense (Down with Bill! Long live Linus!). In the long run, cost will win.

At which point I have to take issue with your statement "A PC provides flexibility and power at a fraction of the cost of a thin client (when you add up the cost of the server and fat network pipe required to support it)." I must be surrounded by some very stupid and/or deluded customers, because they - without exception - take a contrary view. Do you have figures to support your contention?

david

btw I'm not sure what this has to do with the future of Corland. Surely the biggest concern is what those doyens of blind numbercrunching, McKinsey, are going to do with the Borland product line. I can see the writing on the wall for the enterprise product line, IAS and Appcenter, with Visi back to its OEM roots. McKinsey-type metrics will ensure that Corland is set up to position Linux-plus-apps as a Microsoft Windows-plus-Office competitor.

Les jeux sont faits. Rien ne va plus.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext