Thin Client

Expo Comm 2007 Argentina MUP-PC looks like an Nstation in disguise

By Fernando Cassia: Monday, 15 October 2007, 1:06 PM

LOCAL FIRM MUPtech showcased its proprietary thin-client hardware to turn an Win XP Home and XP Pro system into a multi-user server, running up to 10 remote clients per machine using ultra-thin set-top-boxes as clients instead of full PCs.

The firm sells these thin black boxes which the company calls "MUP-PC" which are connected to the main "server" - actually any PC capable of running XP Home or XP Pro - over Ethernet. Each box features connectors for Audio, VGA video, and PS2 keyboard and mouse. The hardware also supports Linux.

The host PC runs a proprietary software "server" which turns a standard XP Home or XP Pro into a multi-user server. It would be like Citrix or Terminal Services but without a PC on the client side, replaced instead with this black box. Where have I heard of this before? Oh yes, Sun Ray thin clients. Basically this is like having a VNC client in a set-top box, to which you can hook a PS2 keyboard, mouse and speakers. Their technology is proprietary, though.

The company claims this gives a up to 60per cent savings in the acquisition costs, and saves on software licences, although the company's web page then tells users to "check the end user's license" of individual software applications. I'm not sure if the Vole will be pleased about the prospect of someone running 10 terminals off a single XP Home and Office licence, but apparently they tolerate it.

The host PC needs a minium of a single-core P4 3.2GHz with 1GB RAM for up to seven users and 2GB RAM for 10 users. To go up to 30 users you need to use Windows 2000 or 2003 Server.

Amazing: the best way to sell the "thin client" approach is not mentioning it.

The MUPtech booth attracted quite a crowd with this concept, as it was explained in terms anybody could understand - no techspeak about "thin client" anywhere, the banners read "turn any PC into 2, 10, up to 30 PCs!" Sun Microsystems, take notice. The Sun Ray think clients you had at the SolutionBox booth could have probably attracted the same crowd if the concept was explained in the same terms. People do not care about buzzwords like "thin client".

MUP-PC flier

The guys at the booth kept referring to, "our proprietary technology". Yet I had in my mind the idea that I had seen these boxes before. When I got back home I remembered where I saw the concept: Ncomputing's "Ultra-Thin Client". Yet, the case looked different from the ones at MUPtech.

So after careful looking I found Ncomputing's L110 thin client which looks exactly the same as MUPtech's "MUP-PC". So, is this a case of some local distributor rebranding Ncomputing's kit appealing to the " trust us, we're local experts" approach, or Ncomputing's decision to go to the South American market with a different brand, or is the firm letting distributors rebrand its stuff? We asked both companies about what relationship - if any - they have, and we haven't heard yet from either of them.

In any case, this is interesting technology, and it supports Linux as well, which is kind of an irony because the X protocol was created to do just that, display GUIs -local or remote- over TCP/IP. µ

Comments
Shared storage may make more sense
Thin clients are a neat trick to pull off, especially on an OS largely designed to be single-user. But since they still require a moderately expensive display, inexpensive keyboard, mouse, and speakers, plus an ancillary box of some kind to convert the back-panel connectors for them into Ethernet linkage and back again the question is whether there's any significant cost-saving over using somewhat fatter clients that include everything save the disk storage.

Mid-range processing power and RAM are dirt-cheap these days, and not having to share them (and a single back-end disk interface too, for that matter) with 9 - 29 other users has real value (in fact, the same value that users perceived a couple of decades ago when their personal computers liberated them from time-sharing). Gigabit Ethernet provides better bandwidth to a back-end storage array than a local disk can offer (even if you're piping data in both directions simultaneously), with minimal added latency (since your caching is still mostly local). And centralizing the back-end storage hardware and management while using a standard-configuration middle-weight client provides all the advantages that using a thin client can, without the drawbacks.

At least that's how I see it, but I'd be happy to be educated if I'm missing something.

Related links:
http://www.ncomputing.com/ncomputing/products/typel100.php
http://www.muptech.com.ar/