Future of network computers

Citation

Rudall, B.H. (1998), "Future of network computers", Kybernetes, Vol. 27 No. 5. https://doi.org/10.1108/k.1998.06727eaa.004

Future of network computers

Future of network computers

Cyberneticians will not be shocked to learn of a report that the majority of users have little idea how their networking computers work and even less knowledge about the way in which the software they use is designed and produced! We could, of course, ask the question whether the users of any of the latest technological devices need to know how they work. The trouble, however, with computer users is that the majority soon call themselves experts and perpetuate the myth, whereas a television user is hardly likely to call him/herself a TV expert. Computer pioneers blame themselves for producing computer interfaces that are so easy to use that children in the kindergarten can access sophisticated software systems. This is, of course, highly desirable but can lead to the present-day ignorance about computer science and technology.

One of the problems with using the Internet has been that users need to be able to understand the elementary interface of a PC, and to use the computer itself on occasions for file handling etc. Now even the easiest of PC interfaces need not be mastered to gain network access and usage. There are many more options as net PCs, network computers and other devices have emerged. All of these provide new ways of networking and present entirely new IT strategies to users and organisations. Companies are now beginning to question their end-user policies. In an article in the British Computer Society's Computer Bulletin, March 1998, pp. 26-9, the problem is discussed under the title "PC or net PC? That is the question". It tells us that the majority of IT specialists are wondering about the future with network computers. The end-user computing world, the writers say, has exploded with options, and is of great significance and they say that:

The lack of understanding about network computers, net PCs and other devices is highlighted by a survey of nearly 250 senior IT specialists in the UK and Ireland by AST Computer. This shows "a staggering 51 per cent of IT Directors actually admitting to not knowing the difference between a network computer and a net PC". Another 10 per cent answered "not sure".

Readers may wish to know that the various devices and their implications are described by Ovum in a new report*, published after nine months research. In summary it says that the following four new desktop hardware products have been identified:

* Network computers are designed to support local processing of Java applications, loaded from a computer. Suppliers include Sun Microsystems, and IBM, with the Network Station 1000. This has 8Mbytes of memory and 1Mbyte of video memory, runs a Web browser, supports Java, plus Microsoft Windows applications via NT, and X-Windows, and has IBM 3270 and 5250 terminal emulation. It has a 16-bit audio through a built-in speaker, but no disc drive.

• •

  Net PC promoted by Compaq, Intel and Microsoft, in particular. It is based on the PC but is smaller, with a floppy disc or CD-ROM drive available as options. It too works across a network with central administration. Compaq's Deskpro 4000N net PC has a 166MHz or 233MHz Pentium processor, 16Mbytes to 32Mbytes of memory and a 1.6Gbyte hard disc drive.

• •

  Intranet terminal iswidely thought to be a network computer but is not because it cannot process Java applications locally. It provides access to a range of applications, via a browser. Only the browser and a local operating system are on the hardware. Options include terminal emulation, again via the browser. Wyse Tektronix, Neoware and IBM, with the Network Station 100, are in this market. IBM describes its products as "a replacement for terminals or PCs that are used primarily for accessing applications on various servers, as well as casual browser use". It has 8Mbytes to 64 Mbytes of memory, eight-bits audio, support for Windows via NT and for X-Windows, and 3270 and 5250 terminal emulation.

• •

  Windows terminal also has no local storage or processing, but simply displays Windows applications, held and managed on Microsoft Windows NT computers. It can work through the mainframe software from Citrix, based on its independent computing architecture, which is winning endorsement from a growing number of big suppliers and which also provides links through other systems. Users are also waiting for Microsoft's own Hydra product, which attracted huge interest at the massive Comdex Fall '97 exhibition and conference.

Two case studies are also published in the Computer Bulletin article: the first on the net PCs, and the second, on intranet terminals. The former study on net Pcs features the Internet service Demon Internet which is installing net PCs in the shape of the Compaq Deskpro 4000N, rather than network computers. This, the report says, is because of its use of Windows. The company say:

Our internal systems are based on Windows NT and we couldn't consider rewriting them. Our call centre staff need the flexibility of Windows. Changing to network computers would have meant throwing out our entire PC infrastructure. In addition we plan to integrate voice and data in the call centre network, and for this we need functionality that network computers simply cannot provide. However, the net PC promises lower costs of ownership especially maintenance, and will enable us to have standard applications and hardware across the network without user intervention.

The second case study gives an insight into the use of intranet terminals. It says that the insurance group General Accident is staking its future IT on network computers and Java with an order for 4,000 IBM Network Stations. It is now installing 2,200, mainly to replace dumb terminals to an IBM mainframe, and will then replace office PC networks, moving to Windows NT. Meanwhile most of its key business systems will be redeveloped in Java by IBM under a facilities management contract. General Accident expects, the report says, significant hardware cost savings both through initial purchase costs and maintenance.

Finally, the report puts the current dilemma of many users and organisations into perspective. It says that Ovum believes sales of the four new devices described here will grow to 22 per cent of all end-user hardware sales in the next five years. Total sales of all end-user devices in the USA, Western Europe and Japan will grow from 120 million units to 140 million. The new devices will replace dumb terminals in particular, cutting the number installed from 30 million to 20 million. It also predicts that the number of PCs will stay roughly constant at around 90 million, although it suggests that portable units will increase to account for half of these.

Readers will wish to know that not only is the choice of hardware changing but also the terms used to describe the new devices. The term "thin client", "network computer" and "net PC" are used interchangeably to refer to new types of desktop hardware which all run across networks and depend on a server but vary greatly in functionality. The four types of new desk-top hardware identified by Ovum are regarded as the so-called "thin clients".

* The Ovum report, Network Computers: Risks and Rewards for Business, and details can be obtained: Tel: +44 (0) 171 312 7218 and on e-mail: info@ovum.com and also on http://www.ovum.com