Ulteo has taken advantage of the Guacamole project’s Open Source RDP client technology to provide a native HTML5 client for the Ulteo Open Virtual Desktop (OVD) presentation virtualization solution for Windows and/or Linux desktops, which we recently reviewed.
We’ve joined many in heralding Teradici RDSH solution’s VMworld announcement. Weaving sweetly around the fact that the actual release won’t be until at least the end of 2012, it is only right that to take a quick jab at the fact v1.0 will be feature lite in comparison to the heavyweight Grand Old Man of desktop virtualisation Citrix XenApp until well into 2013.
In PCoIP Teradici have a remote protocol: but Citirx’s XenApp application is more than an ICA protocol extension for Microsoft’s Remote Desktop Session Host (RDSH). What can RDSH bring to a virtualised desktop environment? Will protocol support to RDSH be enough for Teradici to deliver a service that can complement an existing VMware View environment?
OnLive isn’t. As already mentioned, the cloud gaming provider and desktop service provider has ceased to be. Poor budgeting; ridiculous hardware-to-user ratios; low take-up. Quite simply – more money out than in. Ergo, failure a simple question of finance and poor management.
Nothing to learn here, move on?
Or, can OnLive’s demise give a wider lesson to enterprises? Sure, OnLive were predominantly a games focused company. Yet, the delivery and development of games has driven a lot of technology advances that enterprises use in desktop delivery today: Microsoft’s App-V is software at the heart of desktop virtualisation and was a gaming technology back in the day. Moreover, the concept of any-device access is inherent in range of marketing material from virtual desktop vendors and service providers and also key to pushing game titles to consumers.
But for the better financial planning and an understanding of Microsoft licensing, would OnLive have succeeded? Were they doomed to failure to failure before the off?
What are the key questions you should be looking to have answered from your DaaS service provider?
Are virtualised desktops – be they hosted desktops (VDI) or session desktops (RDSH) more secure than physical? We’ve questioned before the benefits of a virtual desktop infrastructure with respect to security. Is VDI secure? Is VDI inherently more secure than “traditional desktops”? In our article Virtual Desktop Security? Are They Secure? We considered VDI vendor claims that there are several big virtual desktop security wins:
- Centralized Management
- Centralized Patching
- Improved Availability & Flexibility
- and importantly, data is held in the data center where it can be monitored and audited – not stuck out on end devices. Continue reading VDI Security – better than physical desktops?
Citrix’sXenClient Enterprise 4.1 is the first full release since Citrix’s acquisition of Virtual Computer in May. What is new? Is there anything more substantial than a fresh smell of paint? Citrix XenClient had a reputation for being a niche use-case solution, with a limited hardware compatibility list. Does Citrix XenClient 4.1 change that? Citrix’s market dominance has been in delivering remote access to applications – where does XenClient fit a thinner, desktop-PC-lessening world?
Obviously, I’m not going to sit here and laud it that I was right when Citrix actually did acquire Virtual Computer. Because I also said it’d take 12-18 months for integration and here we are, barely 25% of the way through that and a release is out of the door. Like when you bet on Italy in the final of an international soccer competition sometimes you win, sometimes you lose.
Far more importantly, if you’re considering introducing virtual desktop into your enterprise desktop strategy are client hypervisors a tool to consider? What is the competition for XenClient now that NxTop has been subsumed?
The IT world is forever creating catchy new terms to label technologies in the hope that it will better communicate some vital marketing message. Sometimes this approach works, with few exceptions everybody understands what is meant by “thin client” and “zero client” even when the details of the implementation are wildly different – a Dell Wyse Xenith 2 zero client and a Pano Logic G2M zero client may have widely diverging approaches to delivering a zero configuration plug and play experience, but their appliance-like nature and operational benefits are the same. Sometimes it doesn’t; regardless of the merit of the technology it describes, type 0 hypervisor is a term that should be banished from any technical dictionary. And sometimes its too soon to tell. Microvisor is a term used to describe two very different virtualization technologies offered by Bromium and OK Labs that could conceivably compete in the same marketplace at some point in the future. So what about “Cloud Client”? Wikipedia does a good job of defining Cloud Client Continue reading Pano Logic Steals Cloud Client Mantel from Wyse