is cutting back just based on space? or is it also based on computing power?<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 3/2/06, <b class="gmail_sendername">Charles Ulrich</b> <<a href="mailto:charles@idealso.com">charles@idealso.com
</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">Just after Tuesday's Penguicon meeting, Jeff and I discussed possibly<br>
reducing the number of terminals hanging off the terminal server. As we<br>discussed the limitations of the room (at the meeting) and the amount of<br>work and space required to set up all of the stations, I'm now finally
<br>wondering if 20 isn't more work and hassle than we really need to put<br>ourselves through.<br><br>So, I'd like to ask the GLLUG's opinion. Am I truly insane for wanting<br>20 terminals and if so, what's a reasonable number? My guess was
<br>something in the 10-15 range. 10 seems perhaps a little low, but 15<br>might be almost as bad as 20. So maybe 12 or 13 is the optimal number?<br>Arrrrrg!<br>--<br>Charles Ulrich<br>Ideal Solution, LLC -- <a href="http://www.idealso.com">
http://www.idealso.com</a><br><br>_______________________________________________<br>linux-user mailing list<br><a href="mailto:linux-user@egr.msu.edu">linux-user@egr.msu.edu</a><br><a href="http://mailman.egr.msu.edu/mailman/listinfo/linux-user">
http://mailman.egr.msu.edu/mailman/listinfo/linux-user</a><br></blockquote></div><br>