Thin Clients for Thick Applications

Thin-client technology has created a debate in the NT and general-computing communities that forces us to look back at the computing architectures of yesterday and look forward to the computing architectures of tomorrow. This constant head-swiveling can be a pain in the neck, which is how many people regard thin-client technology. But whether you think thin-client technology is a throwback to server-centric, dumb-terminal computing or the harbinger of a new era in Windows-everywhere computing, one thing is clear: Thin-client technology is here to stay.

In my ongoing investigation of thin-client technology, I have explored a wide range of products and technologies. In January, I looked at WinFrame 1.7, the granddaddy of multiuser NT technology, and at Compaq Deskpro 4000, Compaq's entry in the Network PC market. In February, I explored NTerprise 1.3, a multiuser NT product that competes with WinFrame. In March, I looked at the product that has brought thin-client technology to the forefront of the market­Microsoft Windows-based Terminal Server, Beta 1. Also in March, I looked at the pICAsso, Beta 1 add-on for Terminal Server and a unique hardware-software solution, Maxspeed's MaxStations.

In this issue, I wrap up my thin-client investigation (but not the Lab's ongoing coverage of thin-client products) with a look at Windows terminals and network computers (NCs) that interoperate with multiuser NT products such as WinFrame, NTerprise, and Terminal Server. These terminals and NCs are an important part of the thin-client equation because they are low-cost, easy-to-administer systems that deliver powerful Windows-based applications to desktop users.

Terminals and NCs that can play in the thin-client league come in all shapes and sizes and are produced by Microsoft-friendly and Microsoft-unfriendly manufacturers. These manufacturers have a vested interest in NT-based thin-client technology because they know they must deliver products that let users access Windows-based applications. The need to deliver these products results in some pretty strange combinations. For example, if you have an IBM AS/400 and an IBM NC, you must have an NT system to initialize your NC so that it can access the AS/400. (IBM's long-term solution to this situation is to implement NT inside the AS/400, but that's another story, for another issue.)

The list of terminal and NC manufacturers is an interesting one. On this list you'll find manufacturers rooted in the X terminal market (e.g., Network Computing Devices­NCD, Tektronix, Neoware Systems­formerly HDS­Affinity Software, and Boundless Technologies), manufacturers rooted in the dumb-terminal market (e.g., Wyse Technology), and big-name computer companies that want a piece of the action (e.g., IBM and Oracle). You've undoubtedly noticed that none of the foregoing companies is the ideal attendee of a Microsoft love-fest, but that's what makes the thin-client market interesting.

Who Do You Love?
To appreciate your choices in the Windows-terminal and NC market, you have to look at thin-client technology from both the Microsoft and non-Microsoft perspective. From the Microsoft perspective, you would deploy Microsoft-sanctioned Windows terminals on your desktop. These terminals run the Windows CE operating system (OS) and use the Tshare protocol to communicate with Terminal Server. This perspective is a fairly narrow one that the rest of the market does not necessarily share. For example, if you are currently making NCs or X terminal units, wouldn't you rather simply add support for a new protocol (e.g., Tshare or the Citrix alternative, Independent Computing Architecture­ICA) in your existing unit instead of reengineering your product to use an entirely new OS and infrastructure? I know I would. (For more information about ICA and Tshare, see the sidebar "A Matter of Protocol," page 94.)

Most NC and X terminal manufacturers share my non-Microsoft point of view. They see more sense in keeping their own NC OSs and adding support for Tshare or ICA to their existing products. This approach gives manufacturers the best of all worlds: From one NC you can access Windows-based applications via Tshare or ICA, legacy hosts via Telnet or a Telnet variation (e.g., TN5250 or TN3270), or X11 applications. In many cases, you can run Java applications or a browser inside the NC. Does this approach make these products unsuitable for use with Terminal Server? Not at all­it just keeps the products off the official Microsoft-approved list.

The other major thin-client manufacturing segment produces free-standing Windows-based terminals. When you turn on one of these terminals, it is ready to connect to an NT multiuser server via a LAN or modem connection. Wyse pioneered this market when it introduced its first ICA-based terminal several years ago. Since that time, other manufacturers have joined in producing Windows-based terminals. The question for Windows-based terminal manufacturers is to what extent they should embrace Microsoft's recommendation for Windows terminals. Should they throw away their investment in their existing technology (there are plenty of ICA-based Windows terminals in the field) and go to the Windows CE/Tshare architecture exclusively? Or should they hedge their bets and support both Tshare and ICA using whatever OS they want? The issue­and the future­for these manufacturers is not as clear as it is for the NC and X terminal manufacturers.

Create Your Future
As you can see, the Windows terminal and NC market is currently going through a lot of changes. There are many forks in the road ahead, and there is little agreement about which fork will best serve the market. Until the future becomes clear, expect to see different kinds of offerings from the Windows terminal and NC manufacturers. For example, don't be surprised if Wyse offers both traditional ICA and Microsoft-approved Tshare terminal models. Similarly, you might see some of the NC manufacturers come out with a line of Microsoft-approved terminals as they move their multipurpose NCs forward.

Having these choices is a good thing, because it gives you the opportunity to vote with your purchasing dollars. If we all go out and buy NCs and ICA-based Windows terminals, that will end the life of the Microsoft-approved Windows terminals. Alternatively, if we insist on Microsoft-approved terminals, that will send an equally strong message to the Windows terminal and NC manufacturers. Clearly, this situation is an excellent opportunity to evaluate our needs and communicate them to manufacturers. In other words, for once we actually have some say in how the future takes shape.

Here and Now
To help you understand where the market is today and where it is headed tomorrow, the Windows NT Magazine Lab evaluated three representative thin-client units. The first, Viewpoint TC Model 200 from Boundless Technologies, is an instant-on Windows terminal. The second product, Winterm 2310SE from Wyse Technology, is an instant-on Windows terminal that Wyse suggests for use with Terminal Server. The third product, @workStation from Neoware Systems, is a multipurpose NC that you can use for Java applications, X terminal applications, and Windows terminal applications.

All three units support the ICA protocol, although each claims it will have support for Tshare by the time Microsoft releases Terminal Server. I tested all three units using both Citrix WinFrame 1.7 and Terminal Server with the Citrix pICAsso add-on for ICA support.