Re: ENOUGH



On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 20:24:13 GMT, "l, not -l" <lallin@xxxxxxxx> wrote:


On 31-Jan-2008, blake murphy <blakepm@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

there was some guy in the i.t. dept. i worked in who wanted to lay a
g.u.i. over the whole thing. not move everything off the mainframe,
just get rid of the 'green screen.' i could never figure out why he
wanted to do that. but that was after he fell off a ladder onto his
head.

your pal,
blake

You've obviously never had to upgrade software on 20,000+ PCs. You'd want
to do it for the same reason many large companies use MS Terminal Server and
run PC workstations as not-quite-dumb terminals, while the actual
application runs on a single, or a few servers. For example, teller
workstations at a bank; you get great benefit from the GUI, but if it is a
bank of much size, rolling out teller software to all those PCs is a
nightmare. Often, they all have to be done at the same time (over a long
weekend, for example) in order to roll-out new products, meet new legal
requirements or complete a merger.

most of the stations involved were dumb terminals. he wanted to make
the screens look like p.c.'s.

your pal,
blake
.



Relevant Pages

  • Re: [SLE] SuSE 9 systems builds & rebuilds
    ... > servers, router-firewalls, workstations, and diskless X terminals. ...
    (SuSE)
  • Re: Hacked Workstations
    ... But my idea is to open the whole darn workstations ... AD on the server will ... without the dummy terminals they can't do anything, ...
    (microsoft.public.win2000.security)
  • Re: Hacked Workstations
    ... We do reimage the workstations whenever they get "hacked." ... "John John" wrote: ... > without the dummy terminals they can't do anything, ...
    (microsoft.public.win2000.security)
  • Re: Exchange Access from Remote Office
    ... > They don't have workstations, they are running on Terminal Services ... > through Wyse Terminals. ... > a terminal server infrastructure? ... >> and have them work offline by default, ...
    (microsoft.public.exchange.connectivity)