I don’t know how well that holds. I’m not under the impression that much cloud hardware can be or is reused. Also thin clients tend to have short lifecycles
I said zero client, not thin client. A zero client is basically just a device that connects to remote computing, not unlike a dedicated streaming device.
That’s a thin client. You can rebrand it however many times you want. I still see em in the ewaste. At the end of the day you can’t remove the computing requirements of running a network stack, a crypto stack, a compression stack, HID, and frame and audio buffering.
I don’t know how well that holds. I’m not under the impression that much cloud hardware can be or is reused. Also thin clients tend to have short lifecycles
I said zero client, not thin client. A zero client is basically just a device that connects to remote computing, not unlike a dedicated streaming device.
That’s a thin client. You can rebrand it however many times you want. I still see em in the ewaste. At the end of the day you can’t remove the computing requirements of running a network stack, a crypto stack, a compression stack, HID, and frame and audio buffering.
No, it’s a zero client. A thin client has a desktop environment with a limited number of apps. Zero clients are less advanced than a raspberry pi.
That’s a much different environmental impact than a desktop.
Source: I used to run VDI for a global company for a living, deploying both thin and zero clients.
OnLive’s zero-client console wishes to have a word with you.
Oh wait, it can’t. It’s dead.
Even zero clients become outdated, with the additional detriment of being 100% dependent on the service they are connected to.