There seems to be a trend of providers abandoning the commodity public cloud market. We saw HP exit its Helion Public Cloud, and more recently, Verizon shut down one of its Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS) products. At the same time, we see Amazon and Microsoft heavily committed to public cloud and making a lot of money. I think there is a fundamental difference between what the successful cloud providers and the commodity VM providers offer. The big difference is that successful cloud providers sell mostly non-commodity services. They sell services that are not available elsewhere. The value proposition for AWS and Azure is not really in running your VMs. It is in offering services that your applications, or users, can consume. These cloud services are consumed by application developers: information systems people rather than information technology. They lock in customers by delivering unique and valuable services. They have a low cost of entry to entice customers and a high cost of exit to retain customers.
Articles Tagged with RDS
In its first appearance at VMworld, the Mississauga, Ontario–based company Sphere 3D looks poised to create a whole new technology classification with Glassware 2.0, a hyperconverged cloud client app hosting appliance.
At first glance, it looks like VMware’s recently announced Horizon 6 platform is an admission by VMware that applications, rather than desktops, do matter, and that Citrix has been on the right track all along. Certainly, XenApp has been a thorn in the side of many VMware View implementations through the years, allowing people to deliver applications to solve problems that View could only solve by throwing more desktops at them. XenApp has always, for all its problems, offered a simple way to host and distribute applications to a wide variety of user devices.
I have been building solutions on AWS since 2008, and even though that sounds like a long time, I have still only scratched the surface of what is possible in the cloud. Every few weeks I get another “Aha” moment when I see problems solved with cloud architectures that would be either too hard, not feasible, or too time-consuming to accomplish in a non-cloud environment. Here is my latest “Aha” moment.
This week, Amazon Web Services (AWS) held its second annual re:Invent conference. For the past two days, Amazon has been announcing a wide variety of feature enhancements to existing services as well as publicizing new services. Even before these announcements, AWS was so far ahead of their competition in features, customers, and rate of innovation that comparing competitors’ offerings to AWS was almost comical.
In many a desktop virtualization project, there will be a discussion around the type of desktop virtualisation to use. Before you even get to the entertaining “Citrix vs VMware vs Other” quasi-religious debate, there will be a VDI vs RDSH altercation. It can altercate for days. Ultimately, no business question gets asked, nor decision made, as technical stags lock antlers. It is not unusual for this debacle to be silenced by someone simply getting tired of the PoC posturing and rolling out pallet loads of new PCs.
If any year is to be the year of virtual desktops, then it is not just simply a question of having nifty appliances, but also of having a better understanding of desktop virtualization solutions. A recent article from the BBC website on common language gave the ultimate benefit of a common understanding as “world peace”. If a better understanding between people can bring the laudable hope of goodwill unto man, then surely an easier corporate upgrade and better application access will be a mere bagatelle?
The options for purchase for VDI or RDSH, VDI or Terminal Services, for hosted desktops or session desktops are all the same conversation. RDSH is indeed on the back foot through regular re-marketing of terms. Presentation Virtualization Terminal Services and RDSH are the same thing: a multi-user server OS capable of hosting applications and desktops to remote users.
Increasingly, desktop virtualization vendors are ensuring they sit between both VDI and RDSH camps. Citrix obviously – XenApp and XenDesktop. In our Presentation Virtualization whitepaper, every RDSH vendor has a VDI option. But also, “traditional” VDI vendors are being more savvy. Desktone offers a RDSH option. Teradici has delivered on their promise and recently announced Teradici Arch, a software solution for RDSH.
What are the similarities and differences between VDI and RDSH? What can calm everything down and make the combatants think about what it is that they have done?