IGEL_comm_black_1000x174.png

Written Answers to the Raspberry Pi Poll

Why Yes to Pi?
 

  • More RAM, USB-C and USB 3.0 

  • Capabilities improved and the new specs look promising 

  • gigabit internet, dual hdmi, 4gb of ram 

  • More than good enough in many use cases 

  • Dual screen and way more power 

  • $$$$ 

  • Power/$ 

  • We now have multi-monitor support and some hardware acceleration for codecs like h.264.. still no Igel support, but its interesting, might see what other options are out there other than Igel 

  • In Order to display web-services via Browser sessions 

  • Cost 

  • More respectable specs and small form factor in addition to faster network speeds. 

  • Capability and pricing - Pi 4 is the first sub-$100 USD hardware that can run dual 4K monitors and has (in at least single monitor use case) H.264 / H.265 hardware decoding. For hospitals and banks, this is a no-brainer as a client, and as an MSP that serves these spaces, drives the prices down low enough that we could finally push client standardization without the normal "but we just bought hardware 6 years ago!" type pushback we get with more conventional, higher priced client hardware, leaving us managing literally 100 different models of clients across our customer base, and the BIOS vulnerability risks from all the recent Intel vulnerabilities that requires patching all of those. Such standardization would also let us start to keep spares to swap on hand for every location due to the low cost, reducing time to remediation when there are hardware problems. 

  • The Raspberry Pi 4 is considerably more powerful than previous models, so maybe now we could squeeze reasonable performance out of one as a thin client. 

  • Dual monitor, power! 

  • more powerful CPU/GPU and Gigabit Ethernet. The possibility to decode H.265 (with a future x64 OS) 

  • Gigabit, multimonitor, more RAM 

  • Cheap - easy to replace - Workspace Hub (with Screen Casting!) 

  • More power and more Ports (2 hdmi) 

  • Cost and hardware changes 

  • Faster processor. More memory. Dual HDMI. 

  • dual high res displays 

 

Why No to Pi?
 

  • Management toolset didn’t seem production ready 

  • Tool sets are still the same, Pis themselves are fine to use. 

  • Pi is too much of a DIY solution, not backed by a company that cares about the enterprise. 

  • I eat pie 

  • At the moment there is no mature management possibility available. 

  • No IGEL management software available for the pi at the time. I tested using Stratodesk as a client but couldn't justify adding in a whole new set of infrastructure. 

  • Same reason. I need to be able to manage it with existing infrastructure. 

  • No IGEL OS for ARM. Any other possible solutions are just to time-consuming to create/implement/maintain. 

  • Well, yes to use it for other stuff. But not as Thin Client. 

  • There was no centralized management, and they didn't support dual monitors. 

  • No apropriate software 

  • It doesn't appear to be a hw solid enough. 

  • dual monitor support was clutsey. 

  • because I cannot run IGEL OS on them. 

  • Because I cannot run IGEL OS on them. The hardware is great. It is a mini workstation now, but IGEL simply doesn't support the ARM processor. 

  • It was not so stable as I like for production use 

  • Have not tried it det. 

  • Not so stable 

  • Prefer supported hardware. 

  • concerns around the physical security/tamper resistance of commonly available platforms dissuaded further pursuit of the idea 

  • Was split on how to respond to the yes/no question re: pi4. Certainly the increased functionality is some strong motivation to revisit, may prompt investigating options further, however the new release does not directly address the concern 

  • Gen3 didn’t work for us after evaluation 

  • consumer device 

  • No Support, no Management 

  • No Support, no Management 

  • We're a Service Provider and we can advise the customer but if they decide with a classic Thin Client vendor, it's their decision that we can't change. 

  • We are anyhow hooked on it from past versions 

  • less connectivity, too much adapters, unreliable Wifi strength 

  • RPi was too limited in the past, might have changed now with RPi4 

  • Igel dont support it 

  • Not a enterprise ready device, we are using Dell mini pc, or atomic pi. 

  • still ARM 

  • Not considered 4 yet 

  • Haven't seen the platform yet. Willing to look at all PI's as I think they are neat. 

  • Haven’t evaluated the differences 

  • I use Igel 

  • I use Igel 

  • Not against the idea, just like the idea of the Intel CPU compatibility if I need something else. Rather use an Intel NUC over a Pi. 

  • To date, the Pi 3 was not powerful enough. The Pi 4 seems as if it will be, but we've standardized on Igel as our management platform, and Igel doesn't manage / run on Pi yet. We would heavily consider moving to Pi 4 if Igel supported Pi for at least Citrix VDI workloads. 

  • High temperature 

  • Lack of performance on older models.
    Would be VERY interested in using Raspberry Pi's as thin clients if the performance was adequate. 

  • Lack of IGEL support 

  • LOVE The Pi 4, would LOVE to see IGEL support it as a thin client. But love IGEL more than Pi. As soon as IGEL supports Pi, I would absolutely consider using the Pi as a thin client in production. 

  • I want unified management from one console 

  • When supported by UMS I will consider it 

  • Do to the environment being hospital, we want to stay with tested environments, not do as much of the testing. 

  • Dual monitor was missing, now on pi4 it could.