Tim: >> And I'm sure that all the mainframe guys must laugh their asses off >> at businesses which have to go around updating hundreds or thousands >> of stand-alone terminals, compared to updating one server and doing >> nothing to all the dumb terminals. John Summerfield: > And those of us who know how to update masses of Windows systems will be > laughing at people like you who don't. > > http://www.google.com/search?ie=UTF-8&oe=utf-8&q=wsus+site%3Amicrosoft.com I'm quite well aware that there's techniques for central management. But whether someone really goes around personally doing it, or plays around with some form of central automation, doesn't negate the point that networked computers, like mainframes, simply don't have to do anything like that. ;-p A mainframe with dumb terminals still has advantages even over thin clients, which have to cope with getting different hardware to fit in. Not all thin clients are identical, you can end up with a plethora of configurations to handle them all. -- (This computer runs FC7, my others run FC4, FC5 & FC6, in case that's important to the thread.) Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored. I read messages from the public lists.
