Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Child Death Sparks Post-PC Era at Seattle Hospital

kye4u (2686257) writes | about 2 years ago

IT 2

kye4u (2686257) writes "The wall street journal reports that 'At Seattle Children’s Hospital, the death of an infant spurred its CIO, Wes Wright, to install a new generation of PCs providing faster boot-up times. Called zero clients because they contain no conventional operating system of their own and instead rely almost entirely on data and applications transmitted from a server, the new devices can shave almost an hour per day of wasted time per employee. Wright won’t be going back to traditional PCs, even for employees who don’t handle critical cases. “The speed and ubiquity the staff now has – if I took that away I’d have a riot on my hands,” Wright tells CIO Journal.' The CIO claims that making the switch to dumb terminals will save the hospital 6 million over 5 years. I don't see that savings. Is the hospital really better off?"
Link to Original Source

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

save 6 million over 5 years? (1)

amunds0n (2562195) | about 2 years ago | (#41513415)

There are both costs and benefits to this. Now they cannot work locally at all whenever the internet is down, say they lose a router or something, then they have nothing. Also, an hour per day wasted booting up? I question that... just don't reboot every day if that is the case. However, there is a big saving not mentioned. Previously, they would have occasionally lost a PC. This would require reconfiguring a new PC and it doesn't matter how you ghost drive it or have backups, it still is a huge productivity loss as the person reconnects to printers, outside services with encryption, etc.

Hidden Costs? (2)

kye4u (2686257) | about 2 years ago | (#41513671)

I seriously doubt that this is the actual savings. What about the servers that you need to purchase and run to do the data processing? What about the network equipment you will need to buy and run to support the large amount of data traveling across the network? (Using pc’s instead of terminals allows more data to be processed locally at the pc instead of sending it to the server)

What about the additional staff that you will need to manage the network and the servers?

Moving to dumb-terminal big-server model can introduce a single point of failure. At least with a pc, some data processing can happen locally even if the server goes down for some reason. With a terminal, its game over until the server is back up running. Every model has its tradeoff. Does this model make sense?
Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?