• ExcessShiv@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    37
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 day ago

    Running with thin clients for office workers has been default for large corporations for literally decades. Hell it’s even done in engineering heavy professions too. It’s the entire business model of companies like Citrix, and it’s extremely popular.

    As for small(er) businesses, no they’re probably not going to like it, but they hold little to no sway in the matter, so their opinions don’t matter compared to the multi-billion international businesses that fuel this.

    And outsourcing IT infrastructure is wildly popular for businesses of all sizes, because it’s less hassle and direct management when you just pay a third party to deal with it.

    • FridaVermercury@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 day ago

      I think you are overestimating just how many big companies use a thin client-like system. But I admit I might be underestimating it. Out of personal experience, I used to work for a pretty big global company and every employee got their own work laptop to use. And that was a company with 30.000+ employees worldwide. So maybe that is my bias in this, and I would think companies like that wouldn’t so easily give up their digital sovereignty.

      • LostCarcosan@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 hours ago

        They don’t have to give up digital sovereignty. They’lll just subscribe to the Executive plan which grants them more control for cheaper than 30,000 laptops

    • whoisearth@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      21 hours ago

      Oh sweet summer child no it is not. I’ve spent 25+ years in corporate now. Aside from set situations like BCP we are not using thin clients. They’re cumbersome, an absolute bitch to manage, and quite frankly they’re shit (underpowered) and not flexible.

      Sure you may get some pockets of orgs that use thin clients across the board but I highly doubt it’s common.

      • thedirtyknapkin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        16 hours ago

        IDK, in broadcast infrastructure it’s thin clients and virtual machines all the way down, and yes it causes tons of problems.

      • khornechips@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        21 hours ago

        I work in IT for a large healthcare system that runs its EMR (electronic medical record) entirely through Citrix. So yes, yes we are using thin clients. And so is our largest competitor.

        Aren’t anecdotes fun, my sweet summer child? You shouldn’t speak with such authority when you have no idea what you’re talking about.

        • whoisearth@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          20 hours ago

          This is the fun thing about The Internet is that neither of us have any idea what we are talking about.

          What I can tell you is in finance the use of thin clients is niche and is not a replacement for a laptop/desktop. It’s been tried time and time again.

          Yes we virtualize applications using Citrix but again those are niche.

          Now, healthcare may or may not be a different beast altogether.

          Question, how are users accessing EMR. Are they using a thin client workstation for that along with their word, excel, outlook, etc. or are they logging into a portal from their company issued laptop/desktop?

          I’m at a hospital right now and everything here is powered off of laptops hooked up to portable physical workstations.

          Regardless, I digress. I don’t give enough of a shit to care further lol.