> Then I asked him why I would want a thin client when things like the
> DIMM-PC, the Rabbit system on chip, and others are getting smaller
> cheaper and less power hungry each day. His answer was to bring it
> back to the thin client concept and to give some reasonable
> explanations about how if a thin client is stolen all you lose is
> some platic an metal, you never have to wait to boot, ect..
This is all true, but there is another point. Complexity.
Why have your "interface box" do all the processing, too? There
are good points to be made on both sides.
Here's a good example. Most wearables are, at best, battery
hogs. A thin client could, conceivably, be implemented on a
much lower power system...longer battery life, smaller and
lighter batteries.
I wouldn't mind a few AA batteries...I refuse to tote around a
motorcycle battery, even if it's a Sony InfoLithium.
> before in my life) then asked 'What about wearable computers?' and
> the answer was that they are 'a bit ahead of there time' and 'not
Isn't that the definition of "bleeding edge?" I always liked being
on the bleeding edge.
He's right...they are ahead of their time. But, even today, they're
gaining in social acceptance.
> This proved to me that I had succeded in making a wearable that is
> not noticeable :) I am VERY happy :)
Bravo!
> How many of you are using your wearables as thin clients? This has
> some merit, even though I've got the processor power to do
> everything, I might start dumping some work off to my desktops at
> both home and work and really use the WLAN card I bought.
Isn't this one of the concepts I mentioned in my Z80 thread?
-- Chuck Knight
________________________________________________________________
YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET!
Juno now offers FREE Internet Access!
Try it today - there's no risk! For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.
From Wear-Hard Mailing list Archive (WH)
Maintained by R. Paul McCarty
Archive created with babymail