Live data from Hacker News

AWS debuts Amazon WorkSpaces Thin Client device for virtual desktop access

aws.amazon.com

1–10 of 18 posts

Re: AWS debuts Amazon WorkSpaces Thin Client device for virtual desktop access

#3
Really chomping into Microsoft's domain here.

$195 / per device + $6/month usage. Which for corporate IT, is probably a bargain vs some depreciating hardware + Microsoft OS + Office licenses + backups/virus/etc.

Edit: Wait, I misread, it is $6 / month + whatever virtual machine is being hosted.

Re: AWS debuts Amazon WorkSpaces Thin Client device for virtual desktop access

#6
So it is basically an upgraded SunRay 3i except it has a few more smarts (probably including a CPU that has hardware encryption like almost all do now) to reach out to AWS to configure itself rather than needing a local DHCP and SunRay Server software.

Re: AWS debuts Amazon WorkSpaces Thin Client device for virtual desktop access

#8
post #3

Really chomping into Microsoft's domain here. $195 / per device + $6/month usage. Which for corporate IT, is probably a bargain vs some depreciating hardware + Microsoft OS + Office licenses + backups/virus/etc. Edit: Wait, I misread, it is $6 / month + whatever virtual machine is being hosted.

Office 365 subscription licences are quite cheap too. With a bare minimum laptop (say 600usd) excel/word/browser work can be done with no issues. Considering that a laptop is also self contained with no need for extra devices (amazon thin client still needs a screen, peripherals attached) it may not be so much better for IT departments.

Re: AWS debuts Amazon WorkSpaces Thin Client device for virtual desktop access

#9
post #7

There is a good use case for WorkSpaces: DR. Having an on-demand desktop for staff in the event of a disaster.

WorkSpaces definitely has value. The question is whether AWS-hardware vs commodity computers is better.

https://clients.amazonworkspaces.com/

Re: AWS debuts Amazon WorkSpaces Thin Client device for virtual desktop access

#10
I'm not sure they should be promoting this as a device that is suitable for disaster response. They also don't mention the total cost of ownership upfront. Seems like their initial arguement is hinged on the cost of Windows and other licences and they don't really compare themselves to something like Chrome OS.
Post reply on HN