Earlier this year, Citrix announced plans to discontinue its VDI-in-a-Box product. VDI-in-a-Box was targeted toward the small and medium business (SMB) market as a simple, all-in-one solution focused exclusively on virtual desktops. This discontinuation has left a gaping hole in the Citrix product stack. Numerous vendors sense blood in the waters and are attacking this market with full strength.
Mike Schumacher, who founded Lakeside Software back in 1997, has a lively and informative conversation with us in episode 17 of the Virtualization EUC Podcast. Mike’s goal when he started was simple: figure out how a Citrix terminal server would scale before the users logged into it. Anything would be better than the “screaming users” test.
Last year’s EVO:RAIL specification from VMware marked the commoditization of hyperconverged infrastructure appliances (HCIAs). In the months that followed, seven new HCIAs were launched, all sharing a common hardware and software specification, with only minor differentiation to distinguish one product from the next. However, while EVO:RAIL has marked the commoditization of hyperconverged infrastructure platforms for general-purpose server workloads, it has not done the same for VDI. In creating EVO:RAIL, VMware has overlooked the growing importance of support for GPU virtualization in VDI. This has left the market open for innovative appliance vendors to build new high-performance VDI appliances, for which the hardware matters just as much as the software. Continue reading Workload-Optimized Hyperconvergence for VDI
What is the significance of July 14, 2015? It is the end of extended support date for Windows Server 2003. This date is approaching faster than many administrators care to acknowledge, and the reality is that Windows Server 2003 just won’t be a viable operating system for production environments after that date.
Last month at the VMware EUC analyst day in Boston, I had the opportunity to discuss VMware’s extension of support for its Horizon VDI platform to enterprise Linux desktops. While what was shared is under NDA, it’s worth looking at why VMware is making this move.
During a recent briefing from a DaaS startup, I was surprised to hear the vendor report that he was seeing interest from enterprise customers looking to DaaS because they were unable to make the numbers work for a server-hosted desktop virtualization solution. This baffles me. I’m hard-pressed to think of many current circumstances where it is not possible to deliver a VDI solution for less than the cost of a comparable managed distributed desktop implementation. I’m even more puzzled that anyone believes that it is possible to deliver DaaS for less than the cost of VDI, at least not without some degree of legerdemain. I’ll come back to the question of cost comparison between VDI and distributed desktops and how to deliver low-cost, high-performance VDI next week, but for now let’s look at the DaaS vs VDI comparison.