| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Sugarfoot
MagicJack Newbie
Joined: 01 May 2008
Posts: 9
Location: Webberville, Texas
|
 Posted: Sat Oct 24, 2009 8:56 pm Post subject: Thin vs. Desktop. |
|
|
If MJ is set up on a thin client because there are no moving parts, (hard drive), then why would it not run just as well on a desktop with a solid state hard drive, (no moving parts)? I know there are still cooling fans,
Cheap and easy to replace. And seems power consumption could be minimized when the system is idle. Would seem this would be almost as efficient as a thin client without the need for additional hardware. Any input would be appreciated. Lee |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
VaHam
Dan Should Pay Me
Joined: 13 Feb 2008
Posts: 851
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 24, 2009 11:06 pm Post subject: Re: Thin vs. Desktop. |
|
|
| Sugarfoot wrote: | If MJ is set up on a thin client because there are no moving parts, (hard drive), then why would it not run just as well on a desktop with a solid state hard drive, (no moving parts)? I know there are still cooling fans,
Cheap and easy to replace. And seems power consumption could be minimized when the system is idle. Would seem this would be almost as efficient as a thin client without the need for additional hardware. Any input would be appreciated. Lee |
It should work just as well on a desktop as a thin client. I think the difference is that most people run the thin clients with very little else running for processes and this is the real reason they work so much better than running them on the desktop. Very easy to assign network priority to a dedicated machine and few processes competing for processor time on the machine.
As far as power consumption that of coarse depends on the specific desktop and it's power supply etc. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tony
Dan Should Pay Me
Joined: 04 May 2008
Posts: 509
Location: Vancouver, BC
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 25, 2009 1:17 am Post subject: Re: Thin vs. Desktop. |
|
|
| Sugarfoot wrote: | If MJ is set up on a thin client because there are no moving parts, (hard drive), then why would it not run just as well on a desktop with a solid state hard drive, (no moving parts)? I know there are still cooling fans,
Cheap and easy to replace. And seems power consumption could be minimized when the system is idle. Would seem this would be almost as efficient as a thin client without the need for additional hardware. Any input would be appreciated. Lee |
If I recall, my thin client consumed about 9 watts (tested with a power consumption meter). A desktop may still have a regular power supply with fan that consumes more than 9 watts? If you already have a desktop with solid state drive, it makes sense to use it. If you have to buy a solid state drive, then it'll take a long time to recoup the expense compared to using a less efficient computer. In buying my thin client, I figure it'll take over 15 years to save enough on energy consumption to pay for the thin client!!  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB Ultra Turbo Extended Edition Live © 2001-9999, phpBB Group
magicJack and magicJack Plus are trademarks of magicJack LLP. This website is in no way affiliated, endorsed, or sponsored by magicJack LLP, and is an unofficial forum for consumers to openly communicate regarding their experiences with the magicJack products.
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
