Has a cloud service like Amazon web services, or similar, been considered?
Basically everything Peter just said applies, but you'd have the benefit of
scaling up and down as needed and not have to pay for time when school is
not in session, nor fork out for or maintain hardware sitting in a back
room.
At my last employer many applications were installed on a SAN and run in
virtual machine environments so hardware and maintenance could be
consolidated. There was a small amount of teething getting it set up, but
once it was up and running the end user didn't know the difference.
Softimage wasn't installed on the SAN and we didn't have thin clients, so I
can't provide much feedback in that area.
Matt
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2015 09:24:39 +0200
From: <pete...@skynet.be>
Subject: Re: Virtual Apps
To: <softimage@listproc.autodesk.com>
that?s surreal, being forced into buying highly expensive state of the art
tech, in stead of some off the shelf computers, out of budgetary
constraints.
I?m sure that?s exactly how European administration is run.
that VCA looks like it would allow you to set up a nice 3D rendering
workflow, but it wouldn?t really help with compositing, simulations, working
with complex scenes,... or would it?
sounds a bit like getting a shiny new pickup truck, but having to load it
using chopsticks since you don?t have the budget for a shovel.
at least you?ll have the coolest toy in town .
From: Angus Davidson
Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2015 5:44 PM
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: RE: Virtual Apps
Dear Peter
Thank you for the incredibly comprehensive response.
The crazy kindergarten accountancy at the university means that the lab
computers need to be paid for by the schools from their operating budgets
(which are not keeping up with inflation).
However things like VCA are expensive enough to be considered Major Capex
and that amazingly enough they have funds for. So its mostly about reading
the situation at the University and trying to plan around it.
Kind regards
Angus
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: pete...@skynet.be [pete...@skynet.be]
Sent: 10 June 2015 02:41 PM
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: Re: Virtual Apps
if you mean using a thin client on the desk, to connect to a remote
workstation (in the server room) ? then yes ? have used this at a former
studio.
overall it worked quite well.
on the thin client you would launch an app, on which you chose the
workstation to login to and then a full screen window opens on which you see
the workstations? desktop ? and you work you session.
It?s very intuitive ? apart from a few keyboard combos (ctrl-alt-del is on
the thin client, so there?s a different combination to send that to the
workstation)
You could use the thin client at any desk to log in to any equipped
workstation ? handy at times ? chaotic when your team members end up all
over the place.
The overhead on the workstation is pretty much zero. The added card handles
the compression/communication ? so you can push the workstation exactly as
before.
there was hardware compression/decompression of all signals ? so it meant
adding a dedicated card in the workstation - all data (kb, mouse, usb as
well as monitors) goes through network. afaik the screen refresh is done on
the thin client ? which reduces the amount of data to be sent (no screens
full of pixels) but also makes sure that despite long cable length, image
quality is high . (compared to all KVM extenders I ever saw)
To the very demanding artist there is a barely noticeable lag and some
degradation ? you can kind of make out the compression ? but you do have to
look for it. We decided on using the thin clients only for 3D artists, not
for compositors. It would work for compositing most of the time, but when
checking final images/shots, occasional little flicks or spots from the
compression are disturbing. If you are the person who has 3 oversized
monitors on his desk, and expects to have film quality visuals while
modeling ? this might not be for you.
image quality can suffer from network load ? as compression adapts some ?
and at a few peak moments network was so taxed (not because of the thin
clients) that connections between clients and stations were lost massively.
That?s unfortunate and real disruptive ? but once the load was balanced
again you would just login and the workstation was right where you left off
? preferable to crashes and shutdowns. But it?s something to be aware of -
if you have a problematic network, thin clients will add to the frustration.
An added benefit was that there was much less heat generated and electricity
used in the office rooms ? in small cramped, badly ventilated and badly
equipped offices that can be a tangible benefit. I have memories of humming
workstations under desks, burning desklights and running ventilators
everywhere (including on an opened workstation case which is a very bad
idea) creating an unpleasant and unhealthy microclimate. The switch to thin
clients was heavenly. As were LED desklights.
Hope it helps some.
It?s a big step ? that you need to consider carefully with your supplier
(ours was HP) ? and ideally in a riskfree way, where you get the setup on
test, with the option to return if unsatisfactory ? because some
consequences/constraints are unexpected and to a degree it?s a personal
experience. I can very well see this working marvelously in one studio and
being a total no-go in another.
Now, I?m not getting the financial angle ? to me a thin client is an added
cost ? it would not replace any workstations or make them any less
redundant. The idea of a thin client is that the heavy lifting is done
elsewhere ? workstation, server, on the cloud,...
If you mean using a thin client (as in: a very low specced computer) instead
of a workstation ? that?s something else altogether.
Now, a thin client today might more powerful than a supercomputer of the
past ? so there might be cases where it would work.
But if you want to get bang for buck, I?d look elsewhere ? as a thin client
is not made to customize and beef up and ultimately to put decent specs in.
I?d look at barebones rather.
From: Angus Davidson
Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2015 8:29 AM
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: Virtual Apps
