Re: Added costings to pilot plan and resources

Taran Rampersad wrote:
> Ross Gardler wrote:
> 
>> relaxer@... wrote:
>>
>>> If there is any other specfication other than 1000VA please let me 
>>> know befor next week.
>>
>>
>>
>> There is no specification other than the recomendations of this list. 
>> I know nothing about these things and so do not know what we need.
>>
>> It has been suggested (and supported) that we would be better off 
>> using a single UPS for each machine in the network. The machines will 
>> need to stay alive long enough for users to save their work and shut 
>> down cleanly. The suggested spec was 350Va for each machine rather 
>> than 1000Va for a group of machines. 
> 
> 
> 
> I agree. Single point failure for a single UPS is asking a bit much, but 
> then again - is about $450/UPS for a Cyberpower 585 AVR (as an example) 
> too much per machine?

That would really depend on the money we manage to raise and the 
availability of money in the schools themselves. In a great many cases I 
expect the schools will not be able to put any cash in (although there 
are people looking into government funding we may be able to tap).

> (I, too, have price lists. I deal with wholesalers 
> when I source things.)

When the list is stable I think the best thing to do is to ask people to 
give us the best price they can get. The lowest price is the one we use. 
Personally I don't care if someone is making a few dollars off the deal 
as long as the project gets the lowest price possible. Of course, 
sponsorship in terms of mentioning suppliers in the press will also be 
available.

> I look at the UPS rating like a car battery. If you buy cheap, you get 
> cheap - the more Va you can get out of the UPS, the better. 1000 Va is 
> actually what I consider low for 3 machines... (350x3 = 1050) as a 
> snapshot, it may be sufficient, but if there are upgrades necessary for 
> the system which increase power requirements beyond 350.

This is not likely to happen. The machines (except the server) are thin 
clients. All we need to do is keep the monitor and machine alive long 
enough to allow the students to save their work, it really doesn't 
matter if the sound system doesn't work etc

The server is a different matter of course. That will need an amount of 
overhead and will need to be kept alive for longer than the clients.

> What's more, 
> the systems are tied geographically to one spot because of cord length. 
> Not optimal, and not something immediately apparent in a demo lab.

Desk tops are pretty much static. Why do you perceive this as a problem?

> 
>> I look forward to your recomendations and prices. From my perspective 
>> the stability of the server is paramount, the thin clients are less 
>> important, although I'd rather students didn't get a sour taste from 
>> lost work. If experimentation is requried we can do this in the demo 
>> lab which will be built before any installations.
> 
> 
> 
> I think the modular approach is the best engineering approach, and the 
> most sensible in long term costs. We're trying to save money, but... 
> we're also trying to get something worthwhile into the schools, and one 
> UPS failure can bring a school to a halt with regard to the LTSP.

Yes, I think you and all other people with knowledge about these things 
have come out in unison on that one. No argument from me. I will modify 
the plan accordingly. If cost becomes a real problem we can look back at 
shared UPS systems as a cost saver, but we should plan to be as stable 
as possible.

Ross