100% remote driven OS

[kyle17428]

Hey guys, new to this forum. Been watching Linus for a while and finally came over here. Disclaimer: I am probably not as technically knowledgeable as most of you guys so if I seem unintelligent, I apologize. 

 

At my work we use these very tiny hp computers. They are extremely basic- as in ethernet, 4 usb 2.0 ports, and a VGA out. They have the most barebones software and rely on a server for almost all of their storage. Because of the compact size the hardware is pretty terrible and slow. I guess the concept is that the company saves alot of money by having the one good central unit to host all the files and applications and having employees using these cheap tiny units to access it and do their work. And this gave me an idea, that might not be very original but I wanted to see what you guys thought.

 

So imagine having one really good rig, built just the way you want it, can have any assortment of hardware and storage. Now Imagine having a very average, maybe even below average laptop or tablet etc. who's only purpose was to be a portable extension of that bigger machine. The laptop would have no traditional OS to use, it just boots straight to the "mother" machine over a network. It sends your input wireless and displays the monitor wireless. Also this could be done anywhere you can access internet, kind of like windows remote desktop but more dedicated. And perhaps you can even set up multiple users with their own extensions of that machine.

 

I know, its alot like remote desktop, or all those apps you can get for your phone, or even the nvidia shield. and I know that you wouldn't be able to play games really if you left the local network of the machine that hosts it. The big difference I can see is that the extension device would be dedicated to interfacing with that mother computer and I think it would be super useful for people like me, who can afford only one good computer for my house and have to deal with a sub-par laptop when I want to leave my desk. If my laptop only had to stream a video, and send inputs that wouldn't a problem at all. Or imagine if you owned a large office and you could have one big central computer with all the power everyone in the office needs and the rest are just receivers for it. that would save so much time and money I feel.

 

So I'm curious what everyone thinks of this,and if it has been done in the way I am talking about? or am I just dumb?

[Tedster]

My school uses thin clients and it's all terrible - because overdedication on the servers.

[BurgerBum]

so you're thinking of building one super computer and a craptop of smaller pc's that run virtual machines from there? 

am i following correctly?

 

if thats the case it'd be much easier and probably cheaper to just build ever's computer custom fitted to their workload. 

oh, mark is rendering ALL day? give him a render farm of a pc, oh, suzi is just the secritary? she's fien with a NUC.

[Enderman]

My school's linux lab uses a central server where all the accounts and data is hosted, and the machines just connect to it over ethernet, but all processes are run on the individual machines

my teacher uses redhat and some linux server software that i cant remember the name of

 

he used to have it where the server actually ran all of the processes and the individual machines only showed the screen, but eventually the school got better computers that wouldnt be matched by a single high end server

[kyle17428]

so you're thinking of building one super computer and a craptop of smaller pc's that run virtual machines from there? 

am i following correctly?

 

if thats the case it'd be much easier and probably cheaper to just build ever's computer custom fitted to their workload. 

oh, mark is rendering ALL day? give him a render farm of a pc, oh, suzi is just the secritary? she's fien with a NUC.

well what about from a consumer perspective? Like I said, I would Ideally like to just be able to have a laptop that did nothing but stream back and forth from my desktop. Or imagine if you had kids that just used their computers for school and surfing- you would have one good computer to maintain and the rest are virtual.

[SubTract]

Windows consumer OS's (xp, vista , 7, 8) don't actually have the ability to host thin clients.

Without paying for a windows server license and the multiple client access licenses (1 per machine)

Which would make this an expensive task with windows. You can Remote in to normal windows but only 1 user at a time and for this to work both machines need an individual license.

Alternatively you could use linux in which all of the above is possible (albeit a little harder to set up) but you will not have access to a windows environment (short of running VMs)

[kyle17428]

Windows consumer OS's (xp, vista , 7, 8) don't actually have the ability to host thin clients.

Without paying for a windows server license and the multiple client access licenses (1 per machine)

Which would make this an expensive task with windows. You can Remote in to normal windows but only 1 user at a time and for this to work both machines need an individual license.

Alternatively you could use linux in which all of the above is possible (albeit a little harder to set up) but you will not have access to a windows environment (short of running VMs)

I wonder what kind of an undertaking it would be to develop the software im talking about as a third party deal. Im sure it would sell well.

[SubTract]

as a remote protocol its been done. things like RAdmin allow multiple users to remote a single machine at the same time. the problem is the windows OS only creates a single environment on login. Even with multi users logged in only one person can use the system at a time. so even with RAdmin you are still utilising the same desktop.

 

Making it support thin clients would require serious modification of the windows OS which I'm sure would breach the EULA meaning you wouldn't be able to sell it.

You would have to start by creating multiple simultaneous user sessions, multiple desktop environments and multiple individual direct connections to the remote desktop protocol.

 

You could probably run a hypervisor box running a whole bunch of windows clients all networked to a virtual server as a domain controller and a file/print server.

Then have your external clients remote into each of the individual VM's you're still paying license for this though.

You could probably run a linux server as a file/print server forget the domain controller then you would just be paying for the widows licenses.