Viable to go server + virtualisation for a 4 PC home?

[Squilliam]

Ahh so it is possible! Thanks guys, im going to have to do some more thinking/talking etc.

 

[tongue_of_colicab]

Wouldn't it make more sense to have a seperate gaming system just for the sake of not having problems?

Other than that I don't see a problem. I kinda did the same. I got a htpc which also acts as server and its not problem to play a full hd movie and still manage the pc from the other account and I only got a amd 4450e. I had server 2003 running on it and even got all media center software (mediaportal) to work but the only thing I couldn't get working was the windows media center remote controller receiver. Though now i'm just running windows 7. So no as long as you don't want gaming thing will work just fine. Make sure you get a fast HDD though. Noticed that that can really kill performance more than anything else for just office work/browsing.

 

[Silent_Buddha]

Wouldn't it make more sense to have a seperate gaming system just for the sake of not having problems?

It is and it isn't.

The setup and whatnot is going to be far more involved than just building multiple PC's.

On the other hand, if properly setup, the argument is that your "dumb terminals" will never need to be upgraded. You just upgrade the central server when needed rather than each PC as needed. In theory you can reduce costs (power and redundant hardware).

But then if something goes bonkers on your central server, rather than only 1 PC out of X PC's being down, everything goes down along with the server.

It's a matter of tradeoffs.

Regards,
SB

 

[MfA]

Terminals? I kinda assumed that the idea was to simply run HDMI (potentially over UTP) and USB extension cables.

Gaming through some kind of remote desktop setup is a horrible idea.

 

[Davros]

@Blazkowicz
kali makes a lan look like the internet