 |
||||
|
|
|
||
|
Kish on: 
Why Asia is hot
The handheld device market
A "Flash-less" technology
Thin-client and open source |
|
||
|
|
||||
|
|
||||
The thin-client market in the last five years was about one-and-a-half percent of the PC market. It was technology that we use for very specific applications and places, like call centers. Things where there were very specific needs. In a call center's case, it was energy consumption. I think the market did a good pretty good job of finding its natural centers of gravity in the last five years.
But we are now getting to a point where everybody understands that the devices--whether PC, or thin-clients, or phones--are going to continue to be commoditized in price. So the big question is: Where is the value of the thin-client? Is it in the hardware, or software? So removing flash memory will let us drive the costs of the devices down very rapidly. It will also let us begin focusing the thin-client market on software, because with the software these devices won't work. They require a network and a server. So that's the big change we see coming up. And being able to drop the price dramatically, that will give us a commercial advantage, as we not only look at the traditional thin-client market, but also PC replacement market.
Thin-clients now range from US$199 to US$600 depending on options. The goal is to take 30 to 40 percent off that range.
Do you still market thin-client technology the same way you did 10 years ago?
The value proposition is still the same. The difference is that the networks are more robust and efficient, and the back-end servers have become far more efficient than they were ten years ago. I do not believe that the thin-client is the replacement for the PC. I think there are natural application types where the thin-client is the preferred solution. There are many energy companies that use thin-clients because they are in hostile environments, like oil rigs. During the winter, you don't want to go out there to fix something that's broken. They prefer thin-clients because they don't break. The value proposition is still the same, but as the networks become more powerful, thin-client is just seeing a real upsurge in acceptance in these markets.
Last year, Wyse released thin-client support for Linux. How important is open source for you?
We now have a product suite which supports Linux fully. We have many Asian customers who are interested in Linux as an alternative to Microsoft. I can think of one very large country--China--which doesn't want to have anything to do with Microsoft. So we released the Linux client as an alternative for those customers. And we are seeing a real positive uptake in terms of our volume and sales for our [Linux suite].
How far can open source help Wyse's business?
I think it depends on what markets we are talking about. Open source will help us in most government contracts that we are involved with around the world, because most governments are moving away from Microsoft as a preferred operating environment. It will not, however, necessarily help in healthcare, where Windows XP and CE are defacto standards throughout the world, where many medical systems run on those operating systems. It will help us geographically, for instance, in China and France, where the governments there have taken a stance in favor of Linux. In other parts of the world, I think it will be neutral. I will tell you that we have a very partner called IBM, who is not interested in selling anything with a Microsoft operating system on it.
My belief is that open source is an important arrow to have in your quiver but it is not the only one that you should have. You really need to offer customers a choice.
Technically, do you find Linux easier to work with?
One of the chief advantages is the availability of drivers. With open source, it is easier to deal with proprietary hardware, like biometric or smart card readers, because you have a much larger group of engineers working on building these drivers.
Other advantages: It is lightweight and easy to use. It is a viable alternative, but I will not come out and say that it is better than Microsoft because I don't think it is. I think they are both credible alternatives, and customers will make their choices based upon a variety of factors.
It is not a religious fight for us at all. We are completely agnostic.
Play video
There are currently no comments for this post.