June 23, 1997
Are NetPCs really the answer?
By Bob O'Donnell
Some ideas in the computer industry just refuse to die; instead, they keep coming back
to haunt us in slightly different forms. So it is with the notion of centralized
computing, which, of course, is now the underlying principle of network computers and
their archrivals in the battle for IS managers' mind share, NetPCs.
Officially launched with great fanfare at last week's PC Expo show in New York, NetPCs
are the Intel/Microsoft answer to the Oracle/Sun/Netscape concept of network computers,
both of which take the emphasis away from individual PCs and give the power and control
back to the centralized servers. The benefit for IS managers is that NetPCs should give
them more control over individuals' desktops, making it easier to install upgrades and to
maintain stable computing environments for all their users. The built-in management
features, in particular, should help IS managers track the various configurations they
have to maintain and reduce their help-desk efforts.
But although there's unquestionably some good ideas and solid concepts built into the
NetPC spec, there's also some controversy. One of the most debated aspects of the standard
is the call for a closed, or sealed system. The idea behind this requirement is to reduce
maintenance issues caused by users installing their own hardware or software, but it also
effectively cuts off the ability to upgrade the machine.
Interestingly, not everyone's buying it. In fact, two of Intel's biggest customers,
Dell Computer and Gateway 2000, both announced systems that are close to the NetPC spec
but vary in a few areas. Specifically, these two companies have decided to offer
"sealable" but not "sealed" computers. The difference may sound like
semantics, but it represents a fundamental disagreement about a major aspect of the NetPC
spec.
Gateway CEO Ted Waitte, in fact, went on the record a few weeks back saying he
disagreed with the design spec and said the company's customers told Gateway that IS
managers wanted something different (see "Gateway,
Acer go NetPC route -- but not exactly." During his keynote address at PC Expo,
Dell CEO Michael Dell also said that his customer surveys said IS departments want to be
able to upgrade and add to the machines but still retain all the management capabilities
that NetPCs are to be endowed with (see "Dell touts
advantages of NetPCs and direct sales model."
This doesn't seem like a big surprise to me: After all, one of the big reasons PCs have
gotten where they are is because they can be upgraded and customized fairly easily. Taking
that characteristic away, as the original NetPC specification essentially did, turns
NetPCs into NCs with hard disks. And, according to Gateway 2000 and Dell customers, that
isn't the right answer.
Even Intel seems to be aware of the concerns, because during the company's NetPC launch
event at PC Expo, a company spokesman who defined the "requirements" for a NetPC
offered a different take on the previously hardline demand for a closed box. He said that
something is still a NetPC if it offers the "option" of disabling expansion
options (see "Curtain
officially draws open on NetPC."
Despite this backpedaling, most of the 12 vendors who unveiled NetPCs at the launch met
all the details of the NetPC spec, including a sealed box. My guess, though, is that the
Gateway and Dell customer surveys point to what the market really wants. I think most
shops will prefer a "sealable" as opposed to a "sealed" system because
they'll want the flexibility of making upgrades or adaptations as their businesses
require.
Of course, all of this discussion begs the even larger question of why NetPCs are such
a big deal in the first place. If you simply add a handful of important management
features to a stock PC, aren't you going to get the same thing? It seems to me this is yet
another case of marketing shenanigans obscuring the real facts. But then, that's another
computer industry phenomenon that just refuses to go away.
©
Copyright 1997, by InfoWorld Publishing Corp., a
subsidiary of IDG Communications, Inc. Reprinted from InfoWorld,
155 Bovet Road, San Mateo, CA 94402. Further reproduction is prohibited.
