A 'simple' question...

PostA 'simple' question... by KK » Mon Sep 01, 2008 11:35 am

Which one of the following statements about Dumb Terminals is false?

A) It is a computer with only a mouse & a keyboard.
B) It needs to be connected to a server to work.
C) It needs its own CPU.
D) It's cheaper than a PC.

I can't be the only one who thought it was something to do with an aeroplane...

PostRe: A 'simple' question... by **That** » Mon Sep 01, 2008 12:29 pm

A) A computer with only a mouse and a keyboard? False. The original dumb terminals did not have mice - indeed, without the means to have an addressable cursor position a mouse would've been useless anyway - they consisted of a keyboard and a display screen only.

B) It needs to be connected to a server? True. Dumb terminals can only transmit to a mainframe.

C) Dumb terminals had their own CPUs? False. The original dumb terminals had no independent processing capability - they relied on their mainframe for all code execution.

D) Cheaper than an intelligent terminal (aka, a desktop PC)? True, for somewhat self-evident reasons.

PostRe: A 'simple' question... by **Shadow** » Mon Sep 01, 2008 12:30 pm

A

PostRe: A 'simple' question... by **That** » Mon Sep 01, 2008 12:32 pm

Shadow wrote:B

I think you'll find that dumb terminals are an expensive paperweight without being connected up to a mainframe. Of course, by today's standards they're expensive paperweights anyway...

EDIT: :lol:

Nice stealth edit.

Karlprof wrote:A) A computer with only a mouse and a keyboard? [b]False. The original dumb terminals did not have mice - indeed, without the means to have an addressable cursor position a mouse would've been useless anyway - they consisted of a keyboard and a display screen only.
[/b]

Stop being obtuse KP, I haven't seen a dumb terminal made in the last 10 years that wasn't thin client rather than a true terminal. Given the options it could only be C.

PostRe: A 'simple' question... by **That** » Mon Sep 01, 2008 12:40 pm

Commander Jameson wrote:Stop being obtuse KP, I haven't seen a dumb terminal made in the last 10 years that wasn't thin client rather than a true terminal. Given the options it could only be C.

He should have said thin client then, shouldn't he? Besides, wouldn't most modern thin clients be smart terminals rather than dumb terminals, because they actually have limited independent processing capability?

I have to say that this isn't a great area of interest for me so I might be a bit off.

Karlprof wrote:
Commander Jameson wrote:Stop being obtuse KP, I haven't seen a dumb terminal made in the last 10 years that wasn't thin client rather than a true terminal. Given the options it could only be C.

He should have said thin client then, shouldn't he? Besides, wouldn't most modern thin clients be smart terminals rather than dumb terminals, because they actually have limited independent processing capability?

I have to say that this isn't a great area of interest for me so I might be a bit off.

Nah. You are pretty much spot-on.

PostRe: A 'simple' question... by **That** » Mon Sep 01, 2008 12:43 pm

strawberry float YEAH TERMINOLOGY PEDANTISM

PostRe: A 'simple' question... by **TheTurnipKing** » Mon Sep 01, 2008 1:45 pm

I'm actually with KP on this one.

Terminology is one of the single worst parts of the computer world, where "Megabyte" can mean one of about three different things depending on who's saying it in connection with what. That kind of gooseberry fool is what standards are supposed to stop.

If you mean thin client, you don't say dumb terminal.

A 'simple' question...

Is it...

Who is online

Affiliates