777
Xbox wants you to pay 24 to 40 cents per hour to stream games you already bought: Time-based a la carte charges come on top of the purchase price for the games themselves. (arstechnica.com)
submitted 2 weeks ago by to c/technology@lemmy.world
203 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[+] -20 points 2 weeks ago (20 children)

Ok, whats your answer for all commercial companies without their own data centers then? You think they'd all be happy to give up their computers/laptops as well, or pay so much higher prices in the future?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 20 child comments
    •
  • [–] 21 points 2 weeks ago (4 children)

    If they aren't rich enough, then they are in the same boat as us. This ain't exactly new... AWS workspaces, Azure Cloud PCs, Google docs, office 365, one drive. The tech has been creeping it's way into businesses for the last 10 years. Obviously they are getting hammered right now by the raise in prices of new PCs. As the prices go up, they will have to make decisions.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

    My job trialled azure cloud PCs a couple of years ago.

    It was pretty good from my point of view as a user.

    However the cost was higher than $8000 laptops we have, so we didn't adopt it.

    Wonder if it's still the same. Guessing the cloud is still suffering the same hardware price hike anyway.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 weeks ago

    Yeah I get the feeling a lot of people don't understand how crazy expensive virtualized desktops are.

    You really don't go to it to save money. It's for standardization and security and it costs you. Then you're at the mercy of the company anyway. Just witness VMware now.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 2 weeks ago

    Running a comparison, assuming it's in use 8 hours a day 5 days a week, looks like a CPC runs around 640-760 a year (just googling quickly checking the numbers). course that's just basic hourly office computer, meant to be comparable to what normally would be normal office computer. Didn't bother to look and see what say an 8,000 high end graphics card laptop or something would compare... of course if your company was doing 8,000 laptops "a couple years ago", those are probably at least 15,000 laptops today.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 9 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

    "Your company data is safe when using our virtual computers." *Wink

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 weeks ago (2 children)

    And you all think all those companies will just fold their cards and go with it? I don't buy that.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 child)

    I don't think it's going to be an overnight thing, It will start voluntarily, as the price equation shifts. the complications wasn't worth the savings when office PCs were 1500 a pop, but what about when they are 3000 a pop and projected to hit 5000 next year. After more of them make the switch... then say an announcement can happen that microsoft is lessening it's support for on prem servers and workstations, patches will be less frequent. and now it's a risk assessment as well.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

    I dont understand the reasoning behind people seem to think prices for components will climb for ever and ever without generating more supply. if RAM becomes obscenely profitable for long enough others will get in on the act and produce their own to get some of those profits. The only reason people arent yet is that everyone thinks there is a bubble pop coming down the pipe (me included).

    so the two options are:

    • Bubble pops-demand from hyperscalers vanishes, prices collapse

    • Bubble doesn't pop, more supply comes online due to pent up demand, prices stabilize then come down over time

    Neither involve cyberpunk dystopias of cackling supervillians monopolizing PCs

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 38 points 2 weeks ago* (10 children)

    Running with thin clients for office workers has been default for large corporations for literally decades. Hell it's even done in engineering heavy professions too. It's the entire business model of companies like Citrix, and it's extremely popular.

    As for small(er) businesses, no they're probably not going to like it, but they hold little to no sway in the matter, so their opinions don't matter compared to the multi-billion international businesses that fuel this.

    And outsourcing IT infrastructure is wildly popular for businesses of all sizes, because it's less hassle and direct management when you just pay a third party to deal with it.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
    •
  • [–] 9 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

    I think you are overestimating just how many big companies use a thin client-like system. But I admit I might be underestimating it. Out of personal experience, I used to work for a pretty big global company and every employee got their own work laptop to use. And that was a company with 30.000+ employees worldwide. So maybe that is my bias in this, and I would think companies like that wouldn't so easily give up their digital sovereignty.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 weeks ago

    Would you consider that laptop particularly robust? Was your rapid compute power critical to your role?

    In my very similar case, the answers were: No and No

    A lot of the work I did was subtly cloud-based. If the internet was slow, "local" tasks slowed significantly.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 2 weeks ago (5 children)

    Oh sweet summer child no it is not. I've spent 25+ years in corporate now. Aside from set situations like BCP we are not using thin clients. They're cumbersome, an absolute bitch to manage, and quite frankly they're shit (underpowered) and not flexible.

    Sure you may get some pockets of orgs that use thin clients across the board but I highly doubt it's common.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 7 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

    I work in IT for a large healthcare system that runs its EMR (electronic medical record) entirely through Citrix. So yes, yes we are using thin clients. And so is our largest competitor.

    Aren’t anecdotes fun, my sweet summer child? You shouldn’t speak with such authority when you have no idea what you’re talking about.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 child)

    This is the fun thing about The Internet is that neither of us have any idea what we are talking about.

    What I can tell you is in finance the use of thin clients is niche and is not a replacement for a laptop/desktop. It's been tried time and time again.

    Yes we virtualize applications using Citrix but again those are niche.

    Now, healthcare may or may not be a different beast altogether.

    Question, how are users accessing EMR. Are they using a thin client workstation for that along with their word, excel, outlook, etc. or are they logging into a portal from their company issued laptop/desktop?

    I'm at a hospital right now and everything here is powered off of laptops hooked up to portable physical workstations.

    Regardless, I digress. I don't give enough of a shit to care further lol.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

    The initial claim was that thin clients are the "default" for large companies, and yes we can confidently say that's bullshit.

    I'm not surprised that healthcare could be an exception, given all the pii that is dealt with there. But thin clients are not the default at most companies.

    It's insane how people can't just admit they they're blatantly wrong about something and instead play this gaslighting game where they pretend something is unknowable.

    The global size of the thin client market is less than $3 billion. Do you honestly believe that covers most "large corporations" on the planet? I guarantee you that employers with thin clients as the default workstation aren't just a minority, they're a niche market. https://finance.yahoo.com/technology/articles/thin-clients-global-strategic-business-103200706.html

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 2 weeks ago

    The default? I've never worked for a corporation with thin clients as the main workstation for employees. The only place I worked at with thin clients was a federal government office.

    Can't believe this nonsense has so many updoots.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent