I was at a Sun partner today who also resell products from another thin client vendor. I picked up a brochure they had on their current range.
I have nothing against this vendor in particular and am quite happy to agree that on occasion they might have the better tool for the job than Sun do. That said, I was amazed to count no less than 15 different thin clients in their product range. That strikes me as being overly complex.
In a shameless plug, I remembered a blog post I wrote last year on the subject of how managing Windows or Linux based terminals can be as complex as having a PC network.
For some reason, the hardest thing to get across is the issue of 'having' to manage a server as part of a Sun Ray set up. I don't see why this is an issue. What would you rather look after? -
\* 100 thin clients, each with an individual OS and applications, plus a management server to provide and provision updates and so on.
\* 100 Sun Rays which require no maintenance at all and a server controlling them?
If I'm missing something obvious, please pitch in with your comments, but it strikes me that if you're looking at thin clients to solve manageability and other cost issues, keeping complexity on the desktop itself isn't always the best way forward.