The argument I presented was specifically the cost of hardware; I'm ignoring software costs and support costs. You would buy the cheapest hardware, then the cheapest software, bearing in mind support costs.
My point is that the IBM NC must be the same price as, at the least, a low-end diskless workstation. Why? Because the secretaries need a processor, a monitor, a keyboard, a mouse, a network connection, local memory, a power supply. What have you got? A diskless PC. How much is that, from Fry's? About $800 (with a hard disk, actually, and without a monitor). Drop the HD, and it would be around $600). How much is the IBM NC? About $700. And I bet IBM are subsidising it; the PC industry as whole has got to be cheaper than IBM fabs/assemblies.
That's my point. If I'm buying a diskless workstation, I'd buy an Intel one because it'll be cheaper than anything else.
Richard |
