Roy Schestowitz wrote:
> __/ [ BearItAll ] on Thursday 03 May 2007 09:40 \__
>
>> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>>
>>> Firefox claws more users from Microsoft
>>>
>>> ,----[ Quote ]
>>> | Firefox continues to claw users away from IE - the most recent measure
>>> | by web analyst NetApplications shows Firefox has a worldwide market
>>> | share of 15 per cent, compared with 78 per cent for IE.
>>> `----
>>>
>>> http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2007/05/02/1177788202450.html
>>>
>>
>> Web applications have to take off big time, the potential is too huge to
>> ignore.
>>
>> Imagine this, in your home.
>>
>> You have a Linux server, on there all of your main applications run.
>>
>> There different forms of this,
>>
>> One where the processing is done entirely on the server so your client
>> only needs to view the resulting view. No need for anything other than
>> key response code on your handheld device or guest's computer.
>>
>> <various levels of shared processing with the clients, up to>
>>
>> The kids have a mega computer in their bedroom, so might as well let that
>> take over some of the processing, particularly processing that doesn't
>> need to return to the server after it has finished, games or processes
>> that do not produce a data result that the server end needs to know
>> about.
>>
>> Then the idea extends, because the applications are on the server and
>> therefore clients can be cut down to a bare minimum, does every client
>> actually need a view? Lights out, curtains closed, dog fed...
>>
>> Yes I know those are more the fun side of things, but appliance control
>> is much more possible in a Linux environment than it ever was in an MS
>> environment. Little viewless wifi modules.
>>
>> Then of cause update day. So dad logs into xen-home2, checks the update
>> was ok and the mirror is up to date, switches xen-home2 to live then sets
>> xen-home1 to update itself. Then he takes the trash out, just another
>> household chore. That is as easy as it should become.
>
> I sort of do the server(host)-client thing in the sense that over a
> 100Mbit connection I always use just one computer and SSH to access one
> from another. Backups are also simplified, so they automatically put the
> server's content in 3 places overnight. I have done this for several years
> and it has many advantages. Luckily, the server never ever goes down, but
> in cases of outages the routers take time to recover. In the interim,
> there's no access to your data. Still, centralisation (of bookmarks,
> cookies, passwords, applications, etc.) is a wonderful thing. It saves a
> lot of time.
>
Take the work off the router and onto the server, you want a situation where
you aren't dependant upon peripheral devices. So dhcp, dns lookup want to
be on your server, that paves the way for a faster web too by using
cacheing.
|
|
