Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 10 Apr 2001 11:34:04 -0600
From:      Duke Normandin <01031149@3web.net>
To:        Ted Mittelstaedt <tedm@toybox.placo.com>
Cc:        FreeBSD <freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG>
Subject:   Re: BSDi Acquired by Embedded Computing Firm Wind River
Message-ID:  <20010410113403.C206595@mandy.rockingd.calgary.ab.ca>
In-Reply-To: <001f01c0c192$603efaa0$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com>; from "Ted Mittelstaedt" on Tue, Apr 10, 2001 at 12:46:39AM
References:  <Pine.GSO.4.30.0104092036280.23718-100000@corten8> <001f01c0c192$603efaa0$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Apr 10, 2001 at 12:46:39AM -0700, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:

> When discussing desktops and servers in context together, here
> is the definition:

Once again, more pieces to the Unix (et al) jig-saw.... ;) 

> Server:  That which is intended and generally provides services to desktops,
> over the network.
> 
> Desktop:  That which is primary purpose is to serve as a user interface
> between the human and the services provided by servers on the network.

So the "dumb terminal" hung on a DEC mainframe that I use to have in my
office would then fall into this category? Is it then accurate to say that
the terms "workstation" and "client" also fall into this category in a
distributed processing model?

> But, before we forget, there's one other type of system:
> 
> standalone:  A host that is intended and generally uses services that it
> provides itself, and where network connectivity is not particularly critical
> to it's operation.

So a "standalone" can behave as both a server *and* a client/desktop/WS?
 
> Basically, a desktop is used by one person to access resources
> on the network.  A server is used by many people that are accessing
> it's resources over the network.  A standalone is used by a person that's
> only using services provided by that machine - regardless of whether it's
> connected to a network or not.
> 
> Of course, many corporate networks are somewhat fuzzy, in that often
> users may spend much time running Word or Excel and just using their
> own desktop's resources.  But, then when it's time to share their
> files they copy them up to a server, or e-mail them to each other,
> they usually don't share out sections of their hard disk.  In these
> cases the intent, particular by the corporation, is that the desktop
> system does not provide services on the network.  Also, the intent
> by the corporation is that the user assigned to the desktop use it
> to access other network resources, particularly shared calendaring,
> e-mail, files, etc.  Also, Word and Excel are primariarly user interfaces
> to the actual physical data in the computer.
> 
> What's confusing is that many people have taken the word desktop used it
> when they are talking about a consumer standalone system.  One rule of thumb
> is that if you can pull the network connection out of it and not notice,
> it's probably a standalone.

I think that I've made that very mistake, but with a twist. The
server/client or server/work-station distinction were/are clear to me for
the most part. However, for some reason, I interpreted a "desktop"
machine as one running X-Windows and used as what you describe as a
desktop above. I guess that it hadn't sunk in that your "desktop"
machine could very well be running only console apps. The previous
discussions on this thread are now fitting into place a bit better, ;)
-- 
-duke

Calgary, Alberta, Canada


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010410113403.C206595>