In January, Citrix announced the acquisition of Unidesk. There has been tremendous excitement about this addition to the Citrix portfolio.
As you may recall, Citrix attempted application layering technology on its own in early 2016. As part of XenApp/XenDesktop 7.8, Citrix released AppDisk, but it never really caught on because there were several third-party products that addressed app layering more effectively. AppDisk is being retired in favor of the new Citrix App Layering (Unidesk) functionality. There is no defined upgrade path from AppDisk to App Layering, but that’s likely a minor issue because AppDisk adoption over the past year was quite low.
With cloud monopolizing many IT discussions, a great many organizations are somewhere between dipping their toes in and having one foot fully in the cloud. Many get started with Office 365. As with any new technology, embracing it involves learning, planning, and yes, making a few mistakes, before making the plunge.
At the Citrix Summit conference in Anaheim, California, yesterday, President and CEO Kirill Tatarinov announced the acquisition of Unidesk. Congratulations, Citrix, on a fine acquisition!
VMware’s next version of View will, should, possibly, hopefully include the Windows profile optimisation solution that VMware bought from RTO Software. The intention was to ensure VMware would, at last, have an in-house solution to make accessing non-persistent desktops less cumbersome, getting View on par with other VDI vendors who have offered some form of integrated profile management solution for some time. But since VMware’s purchase – Citrix has acquired RingCube.
Delivering a virtual desktop OS to users is a mere bagatelle. Providing a locked-down, standardized workspace to task-based users can be straight forward, but not every company just has users focused on a single set of tasks. If a desktop virtualisation project is to be successful, delivering services to autonomous users is key: those users are more likely to be the organisation’s greater revenue generators, they are more likely to be more demanding in terms of resources, they are more likely to want to access their applications and data from a range devices. They are also more likely to kick up a fuss when a solution doesn’t work. That said, regardless of the type of user it is more likely they don’t care what OS is, rather can they use the applications they need and can they get access to their data.
As we’ve mentioned before if Presentation Virtualization/Terminal services are excluded, VDI hailed as the next generation of desktop solutions from the likes of Citrix, Quest and VMware, still hold less then 3% of the desktop market. Many CIOs have been holding back from taking the plunge from moving to a virtualised desktop model. A profile management service in View would have brought parity with other VDI solutions – but would it bring a spring in sales? Will VMware’s investment in RTO justify the money, or does the solution that they have now deliver too little, too late? Is a profile optimisation solution alone good enough?
This also leads to the question – does VDI need User Virtualization, or does User Virtualization need VDI?
After two years in development, the latest workplace collaboration service, Podio, was stood up to be counted at the end of March. Podio is focused on improving execution and collaboration for business processes, knowledge and projects. With Podio, business teams can define their own customizable work spaces: without external programming support.
Why is this important? There is much discussion on improving desktop management: and typically the driver is “to reduce cost”. This involves looking to ease deployment; introduce user personalisation and rights control; considering application virtualisation. The simple fact is, if you want to control your desktop management costs, you introduce better management: you make an unmanaged device, a managed one. However, when tightly defining a desktop workspace and controlling how it is configured (to reduce costs) it often prevents users from accessing their data in ways that they need. IT can become a barrier, not an enabler.
It has been said before desktop virtualization can be hard. The virtual desktop may have become real, but it is not mainstream. Is this because current virtual desktop deployment models are not mature enough, or the models are flawed?
Desktop management is expensive if it is unmanaged on a LAN: it is most expensive when those unmanaged desktops are distributed (be it across regional offices, or roaming users, or both). Centralisation can reduce these costs, putting you in a position where the IT you manage enables, rather than disables, the business. However, centralisation of desktop services is costly.
Centralisation solutions either focus on solutions that require a large investment in data-centre resources (such as Desktop Virtualization or Presentation Virtualization), or require you to separate management functions and duplicate administrative effort (mix VDI with A.N Other solution). UniDesk, for example, have looked to re-invent how centralised virtualised desktops are managed; MokaFive and VirtualComputer have enterprise ready options for managing workspace delivery to devices but there is a requirement to deploy and manage a hypervisor on the end device. If your goal is to manage what you have better to reduce your costs – do you have to have hypervisors; do you have to remote your desktop?
Wanova have developed a Distributed Desktop Virtualization (DDV) solution – Mirage – with which they look to solve issues of desktop management with distributed environments, without the need for hypervisors, without the need for expensive data-centre resources and remoting protocols. In this article we’ll take a look at the challenges of desktop delivery, how Mirage works and how can it impact your desktop management.
By definition, a Mirage is a displaced image of distant objects, rather than an hallucination. Can Wanova offer the facility to deliver virtualised desktops to disparate devices – or are they just making it up?