Responses to the NetPC vs. NC article

You may recall the NetPC vs. NC article from a few weeks ago. Most peopleseemed to agree with me: the NetPC is a far more viable platform than theNC. Here are a couple of interesting responses, and a quote from PC Weekthat totally disagrees with me:--Paul...I think your analysis is a good one on almost every count but, as Iread thru it, I was struck by how many of your negatives for the NC woulddisappear were the items to be associated with multi-Mps thru-put ratherthan the 28-33kbs that you assumed in your comparison. (Hard to believethat these now feel like 300 baud once did.) The MS approach still comesout ahead in that scenario, but not by nearly so much.Regards,Tim Spofford --While for the home market NC seems pretty ridiculous (and you do make the point that is quite a large market) I think that a large number of businesses have a real need for it. While not having local storage seems a huge problem to home users it is a huge advantage to businesses. Many large corporations spend a lot more money on PC support than they do on the actual hardware and software. This is because (as we all know) PC's can be a bit quirky, especially when every user tries to customize the system to his or her own needs. The NC is a good solution to this problem even though it seems a bit expensive from the point of view of a home computer user. After all, the user can't change anything important on an NC machine as everything important is done by the servers. Many system administrators are going to buy into this technology as it gives them the control they have always wanted but could not have over true PC's. Jeff Giles-- These turkeys need some more stuffing As I type this column on the eve of Thanksgiving, one thought comes to mind: turkeys. The computer industry certainly has seen its share of flops this year, so without further ado, here are my Turkey of the Year Awards for 1996 (through November -- who knows what December will bring?).NetPC. I guess we have to take this new "platform" seriously because it's backed by the Wintel monopolies, but c'mon--talk about a reactive announcement with little substance. It's great that Microsoft and Intel want to push down the cost of owning and managing PCs. But they should worry about lowering the exorbitant costs associated with current desktops instead of wasting our time with a network computer-wannabe.Rob O'Regan PC Wee