Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
Search

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Thin Client PC Fits in Wall Socket

Posted by Zonk on Thu Jun 01, 2006 11:08 AM
from the best-toys-ever dept.
Hardware IT
ukhackster writes "Last year, there was a lot of excitement about a cut-down PC that fitted into a wall socket. Next month, the Jack PC will go on sale in the UK for just £209 ($390)." From the article: "At a low price and using low power, MacLellan believes the device is 'one of the biggest developments in PCs that we have seen' and is one of the 'ever-growing range of thin clients, which are rapidly replacing PCs as a more effective desktop computing solution for modern businesses'. The Jack PC runs Windows CE, is designed to connect to 'any terminal server-based environment' and has Citrix ICA and Microsoft RDP clients built in. It runs Internet Explorer 6.0 to connect to Web-driven applications, and runs an 'up to 500MHz' AMD RISC processor, which the company says is equivalent to a 1.2GHz x86. It can come with up to 64MB of flash memory and 128MB RAM."
+ -
story

Related Stories

[+] World's Smallest Linux Box Fits in RJ-45 Jack 347 comments
An anonymous reader writes "German electronics company Kleinhenz is shipping a network-enabled Linux system built into an RJ-45 Ethernet jack. "Picotux" has a 55MHz ARM processor, 2MB of Flash, 8MB of RAM, a serial port, and five lines of GPIO. It measures 0.75 x 0.75 x 1.4 inches (19 x 19 x 36mm), and weighs 0.64 ounces (18 grams), packaged in a metal housing. A wireless 802.11 version appears to be on the horizon, too. So, if you've ever wanted to network-enable, say, a robot, boombox, or model airplane, this could be the system for you." Is this really the world's smallest? It looks a bit chunkier than a tiny gumstix machine.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

Thin Client PC Fits in Wall Socket 25 Comments More /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.

  • If it fits in a wall jack... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by rootofevil (188401) on Thursday June 01 2006, @11:14AM (#15445157) Homepage Journal
    ...why do you have to plug in a DC 5v connector to the front?
    • Because most likely, they figure people pre-planning an installation of these will opt to power it with "power over ethernet" instead of using the 5VDC jack on the front anyway.

      Power over ethernet allows use of normally unused wires on your standard CAT5 cabling to supply power for devices like this.

    • Optional (Score:3, Informative)

      by cerelib (903469)
      Here is what it says in their installation brochure:

      "DC Power Jack for wall-mounted power supply, when no PoE is available and the device is to be powered externally"

      They probably added this because the brochure shows how the Jack can be installed into furniture(desks), floors, or walls. It does seem funny at first glance though. Especially if you imagine patching together an outlet and a Jack that are next to eachother.

    • Re:If it fits in a wall jack... (Score:5, Informative)

      by iBod (534920) on Thursday June 01 2006, @11:28AM (#15445332)
      No, it fits into a standard electrical wallbox - it doesn't plug into a power socket.

      It can run on PoE (Power over Ethernet) or on a 5V DC adaptor.

      Though it would be nice if you could have a unit in a double-wallbox form that had a PSU you could directly wire to the mains.

  • what would this be used for? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by yagu (721525) * <yayagu @ g m a i l .com> on Thursday June 01 2006, @11:14AM (#15445159) Journal

    This is an interesting device, but:

    advantages:

    • tiny
    • low power consumption

    disadvantages:

    • difficult if not impossible to move around (though it's not entirely clear -- is it a "plug and play" into a pre-installed wall jack? If so, then it becomes "moveable", but requires custom installation of jacks anywhere you'd use it.)
    • low powered processing
    • WinCE
    • IE6
    • limited standalone capability (designed to leverage Terminal Services)
    • price (not really that inexpensive, no bargain over current desktop prices, but much less functionality)
    • video memory (max video memory is 8M)
    • video resolution (max is 1600x1200)
    • expandability

    I can't quite figure where this product fits. I'm guessing it's more of a business solution, but if that's true, I can't imagine it in any of the business settings I've experienced.

    It's kind of cool technology, but is it a solution in search of a problem?

    • It's kind of cool technology, but is it a solution in search of a problem?

      I think you've really identified the issue here. It's got fanstastic "wow" power, but when you sit down to figure out where it can/will be used, the applications seem so be pretty narrow in scope. I could see it as part of a POS system, or in a cube farm for non-technical types. It might have been a real contender if the server-terminal system popular 20-30 years ago hadn't devolved into a 2GHz machine on every desk. It might make
    • Since it is a low power device, it is targetted at all those workers not reputable to be 100 Watts guys. Since, it requires only 5 Watts, seems the right fit for marketing employees.

      Jokes aside, multiply the power consumption for the average PC by the number of employees and many of them obviously don't need much powerful CPUs, and anyway, the CPU power is on the terminal server and available if needed. So, this is a green solution to reduce electricity bill in many shops. And it's not to say this is a low

    • HOTELS HOTELS HOTELS!!!!

      They will eat this stuff up. Check your email from the room, great for travelling families and folks who *don't* have laptops. Use the usb connection to send out pictures from the vacation, or update the iPod for the beach. Yes, they'd have a server, but they'll also charge you $10 a day to use their "pc". And being a thin client, no matter what porn or spyware you wade through, it can be set to toast everything on exit. Just nail the monitor to the desk and put a "fluid" resistant m
    • # difficult if not impossible to move around (though it's not entirely clear -- is it a "plug and play" into a pre-installed wall jack? If so, then it becomes "moveable", but requires custom installation of jacks anywhere you'd use it.)

      For some environments, these are cheap enough to just scatter around the office. But even for locations that aren't, in most places workstations hardly move around. My workplace, for example, the same damn systems are in the same damn spots from 6 years ago.

      # low powered processing

      I don't need a lot of power. I have 3 apps I need to work ( two propriety dental apps, and ms office ). That's it. Not a whole lot of processing required.

      # IE6

      Again, most enviroments don't need workers going on the web for anything, so this is a moot point.

      # limited standalone capability (designed to leverage Terminal Services)

      This is actually a benefit..of sorts. A more centralized computer model is what we should have been moving to this entire time. Why do my clients need all this horsepower and harddrive space if they are just doing basic word processing?

      Answer: No reason in the world. This is a far more efficient solution. Technical merits of Terminal Services notwithstanding.

      # price (not really that inexpensive, no bargain over current desktop prices, but much less functionality)

      Except what you end up paying for maintence in the long run. Fewer things to break, lower chance of breaking.

      That alone makes this gold.

      # video memory (max video memory is 8M)
      # video resolution (max is 1600x1200)

      Most industries, this doesn't matter worth beans. As long as the damn thing can display windows and a reasonable res ( 1280x1024 is the high range of reasonable ), then it's fine.

      # expandability

      My clients don't need expandability. They need reliability and simple.

    • Re:what would this be used for? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by djwoodard (944832) on Thursday June 01 2006, @11:40AM (#15445481) Homepage
      "...is it a "plug and play" into a pre-installed wall jack?" From the vendor's Web site (http://www.jadeintegration.com/jackpc.php [jadeintegration.com]), "Please note you MUST use the custom mounting boxes - the units will NOT fit into standard 1G pattresses." As to who might use these, I work in a public school and am the only IT for four buildings, 1000 students and teachers, 250 PCs/laptops, and four (soon to be eight) servers. We are looking into thin client devices to cut down on the number of trips I have to make to school buildings in order to repair PCs. One of the concerns we've had is the physical damage the clients will sustain from young children accidentally knocking them off the table. A walljack thin client would alleviate that concern, while reducing (physical) maintenance, centralizing system maintenance, and improving my support times. BTW, one of the points of thin clients is that you do not need to move them around. If someone moves into an office, they can just use the thin client that is already there - no need to swap PCs. Some of your other disadvantages are solved on the server end. Need more powerful processing? Upgrade the server. Don't like IE? Install Firefox on the server and give users access to it. Granted, no one is going to use these for AutoCAD or Quark, but for general office programs the video memory and resolution are sufficient. All of which is a long way to answer the question, "Who would use these?" Someone who needs to adminster lots of computers that are only used for general office applications, that's who.

    • Re:what would this be used for? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by wwest4 (183559) on Thursday June 01 2006, @11:43AM (#15445508)
      The product fits in cube farms where everyone needs to use Office & Outlook at a minimum (i.e. nearly everywhere on God's Green Earth).

      -mobility: it can't be that difficult to move, and who cares anyway? it's meant to be install-and-forget. you don't upgrade/repair thin clients as often as PCs. that's the idea--they're appliances, not PCs.

      -CPU: thin clients don't run much locally. that's the point. apps runs on the server. only the user interface stuff is done on the client (keyb, vid, mouse)

      -OS: All WinCE has to to is run ICA and RDP, which it does just fine.

      -IE6: Just have the users run mozilla in their terminal server session. problem solved.

      -limited standalone capability is a feature, not a bug.

      -price: not actually bad considering what you're getting.

      -video memory: thin clients are not meant to be graphics workstations.

      -resolution: 1600x1200 is (arguably) plenty for everyday office productivity use

      -expansion: Most modern thin terminals support at least USB peripherals (scanners, flash memory, drives, etc) in concert with Terminal Services and Citrix; I don't see whu this one would be any different. Aside from occasional firmware updates, you don't change much on the client. You're not meant to.

      No offense, but I'm continually amazed by the general ignorance of the intended application of thin clients. If it's as good as advertised, this box is a sweet thin client. Brain-dead installation, low cable mess factor, PoE ready, tiny footprint, low-power... it sounds almost too good to be true.
      • Thin clients are ideal in those situations:

        1. Centralized administration.. update software on the main server and your done = much lower administrative overhead. All thin clients offer same software offering.

        2. If a thin client dies, within minutes you can swap it with another thin client and be back up and running (no extended downtime, reimaging, etc..).

        3. Lower power consumption

        4. Lower heat output .. quieter lab (servers are in the closet), lower A/C costs

        5. Centralized network-wide update .. add anothe

  • The obvious question: (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Dzimas (547818) on Thursday June 01 2006, @11:15AM (#15445169)
    1. at £209, wouldn't it make much more sense to purchase an office full of cheap Dells, which offer much more processing power as well as local storage? The only advantage I can see of this device is that it is very compact and wall-mounted... and that advantage is totally wiped out by having to have a bulky LCD panel, keyboard and mouse on each desk.

    IOW, this is an interesting idea that will probably fail in all but a few niche applications - I wouldn't invest in the company. ;)

    • Re:The obvious question: (Score:5, Insightful)

      by rtaylor (70602) on Thursday June 01 2006, @12:18PM (#15445940) Homepage
      No. If you can save 1 sqft of space for each person in say a call centre, which allows you to squeeze in a few extra people, this is well worth every cent.

      At £20+ per sqft of space per month in your office lease, £200 to save 1 sqft is a pretty good deal.

  • Wow (Score:3, Funny)

    by ch-chuck (9622) on Thursday June 01 2006, @11:17AM (#15445192) Homepage
    Imagine a Beowulf cluster of those on a power strip.

  • How much??!! (Score:3, Informative)

    by myxiplx (906307) on Thursday June 01 2006, @11:21AM (#15445259)
    I'd love to move our office to thin clients however I really can't justify the cost. For £200 I can get a 2.4Ghz Celeron with 512MB of RAM, XP Pro, a keyboard, mouse and 17" flat panel monitor.

    So for a little more, I can get a tiny little box instead... wohoo!

    But hold on, that box doesn't include monitor, keyboard, mouse, or operating system. Add those on and for a typical organisation running windows, these devices work out around £200 more than a regular PC. And that's before you even look at the costs of the server you need to run all the software.

    Hmm... so right now I can replace a £200 PC if I spend about £600 per user on a thin client solution... and that will save me money how exactly?

    Until somebody takes a brave leap of coming up with a simple design and mass producing these the prices simply aren't even nearly competative.

    So, thanks, but no thanks.
    • I'd love to move our office to thin clients however I really can't justify the cost. For £200 I can get a 2.4Ghz Celeron with 512MB of RAM, XP Pro, a keyboard, mouse and 17" flat panel monitor.

      What are your monthly electricity bills?

  • Do I understand correct: no network boot? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Mostly a lurker (634878) on Thursday June 01 2006, @11:23AM (#15445274)
    Surely the single biggest win with thin client solutions can be the ability to maintain a single boot image and just have the clients use the latest image. Unless I am missing something, that is not an option here. Given that I can get pretty compact second hand boxes for US$50 or so that work great with Linux Terminal Server, these wall socket devices seem cute but not very practical.

  • RDP is great (Score:3, Informative)

    by hotspotbloc (767418) on Thursday June 01 2006, @11:31AM (#15445364) Homepage Journal
    I hate MS Windows as much the next /. reader but RDP is sweet (either the Terminal Server version or XP Pro for a single RDP session server.). I serve up a half dozen RDP sessions daily and at one time over a 768k upstream link and even that is total overkill (if you only serve up the right apps). If you use XP Pro I'm guesing this wall bug should work right out of the box.

    BTW, IMO the TC mentioned is a bit pricey (but could be a great solution for the right need, is very cool and the wireless support is a serious bonus) since a standard (and still quite small) TC can be had on ebay for less then $50USD. As for CPU speed, rdp requires very, very little. Think Puppy Linux and rdesktop on a PI works fine. Thin clients are a blast to play with.

    If they could just get the price below $200USD it would be great but for what it offers their price is somewhat reasonable.

    • are we talking Solitaire? MS Office? World of Warcraft?

      D00d, they support it all: Solitaire, Spider, Spades, Minesweeper, Notepad, Telnet AND IE.
    • Sorry, had to get that out of the way. It's the coffee talking, really.

      More and more I find that I want a bunch of dumb terminals around the house. Maybe my daughter wants to play the Barbie Princess games on the web, my son wants to listen to music, or my wife wants to check e-mail. This sort of device would be great for that sort of simple stuff.

      The catch, of course, is that you can buy a normal PC for much less. I picked up a nice little Dell Laptop for $400 the other day. It's wireless, has a

        • Re:You don't know Jack! (Score:4, Interesting)

          by jdray (645332) on Thursday June 01 2006, @01:36PM (#15446703) Homepage Journal
          This unit does have some good uses, nailed down public access terminals and switch minimalist offices, but for mainstream thin-client usage I can't see it being very successful.

          Think again. Software as a service is here. Even Microsoft thinks so [slashdot.org], and they're usually the last to know such things. I hate to throw out such things in this environment, but the TCO of an 80-watt desktop machine, complete with floorspace considerations, ongoing maintenance of peripherals, power consumption, etc. drives the price of even the cheapest machines fairly high, putting this unit in competition.

          Furthermore, I'm fairly certain I'm not the only one who would pay a premium for a unit embedded in a wall that replaced a freestanding thing. For evidence of this, check out the market for in-wall speakers. Sure, you can buy a Polk Audio bookshelf speaker for much less than an equivalent wall-mount speaker, and it's much easier to install after the wall has been built, but there's definitely a healthy market for in-wall speakers.

          I think the real test of this unit for the home market will be how well it streams video. If people can install these anywhere they would want a television (in America, that's a lot of places) and stream video off of a central server either in their house or from the Internet, plus do a bunch of other Internet-type things at the same location, they'll sell well.

          For the commercial market, a unit that performs modestly well as a desktop replacement will interest cube farmers who have a lot of clients that do most of their work either by single-application (data entry, customer service, etc.), by terminal server, or via web-based apps. In schools, libraries, and other common-access places, these will make maintenance and theft protection much easier.

          Yup. Truckloads for sure.

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2009 Geeknet, Inc.