TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
On 2012-02-12, at 2:07 PM, Steve Schwarzman <steve -at- writersbookmall -dot- com> wrote:
> I remember when client-server first came out. It seemed a bad idea to me,
> because it seemed an inefficient use of processing power with all those
> pieces of CPU, as it were, sitting partly unused in someone's desktop.
> There's also the question of the human capital required to maintain all
> those distributed computers run by users with widely varying degrees of
> knowledge.
And the difference with traditional client/server architecture is that
before, the resources all ran on the server, with the keyboard and
monitor providing the IO. Now, the processing resources are more
distributed between the different systems. The application and data
are still hosted on the server, but the active copy runs in the client
computer.
> To me, it seems a natural correction to return to the network. The risk, of
> course, is that when something gets messed up, it will get messed up
> centrally. The benefit is presumably that centralization means professional
> management by knowledgeable experts, something that can't be claimed for
> most individual users in most organizations.
The OP talked about offline backup systems, and several mentioned
DropBox, often used for shared collaboration. Their benefit is the
ability to roll back to previous versions.
In another thread Phil brought up OS X Lion's Versions system, that
lets you restore from different versions, but lacks a comparison
utility.
It sounds to me that if developers that followed this thread were so
inclined, they could get a sense of the type of "document" management
system we would find ideal, and build the perfect system.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as archive -at- web -dot- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-
To unsubscribe send a blank email to
techwr-l-leave -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
