After selling the $500 (HOW MUCH?) FX100 zero-client for the last 18 months as part of its Remote Workstation package, Dell has finally acknowledged that the same Teradici PCoIP chipset that allows it to connect to the R5400 rack workstation will enable it to work with VMware View 4.0.
If that wasn’t enough, Dell have also launched a marketing blitz pushing the new and rather desirable Latitude 13 laptops as being ”Ready for Virtualization”.
Does this mean that the Latitude 13 will be shipping with a client hypervisor some time soon, or just that it will have Citrix and VMware's respective desktop clients pre-installed. Whatever the answer I guess Dell must be missing Ron Oglesby more than it knew.
Regular readers of this blog will know that I've never made a secret of my enthusiasm for Project Virtual Reality Check. So with that said, I'm particularly happy to report that Ruben Spruijt will be in Prague this April to present the latest Project VRC benchmark results at the Burton Group Catalyst Europe Conference. We also have the incomparable Chris Wolf presenting Burton Group's selection criteria for server hosted desktop virtualization, as well as delivering a workshop on client virtualization. The only thing that spoils it for me is that while everyone else from Burton Group is heading off to Prague, I will be staying at home working on material for Catalyst North America.
If, unlike me, you have the opportunity to attend Catalyst then Burton Group are offering a couple of cool incentives to help get you there. Take a look at the Burton Group data center team blog, where we are offering a free ticket to Catalyst to whoever submits the best DR story. No DR story to share, then try using the promo code “INSIDER” during registration, you'll get full access to Catalyst EU for the discounted price of €995. And finally, we are so confident you will be enlightened and educated at Catalyst 2010, we are offering a full guarantee. If you are not satisfied with the quality of our conference content and if you don’t learn something that is useful to you, your Catalyst registration is free. Try asking for that anywhere else.
Citrix released their latest XenDesktop single server scalability test results today; showing a dual socket Intel Xeon x5570 (Nehalem) server with 72GB RAM running 130 Windows XP VMs per host. This is a significant improvement on Citrix’s previously published results, and certainly enough to bring it back into line with results VMware previously published.
More important than the results though is the test methodology that Citrix has adopted this time around.
For the past year I have been trying to encourage desktop virtualization vendors to adopt a standard testing methodology for virtual desktop workloads and I am very happy to be able to say that it looks like Citrix has come into line with my way of thinking. Rather than relying on an in-house developed test, Citrix have adopted Login VSI 2.0 from Log•in Consultants as the core of their testing process. Login VSI is a specifically designed benchmark for server-based computing and desktop virtualization environments. You may know it better as part of Project Virtual Reality Check the joint project by Log•in Consultants and PQR. Project VRC is the only fully independent benchmark of desktop virtualization workloads running on diverse physical and virtual platforms. By establishing themselves as trustworthy independent subject matter experts, the Project VRC team has benefited not just their customers but a global audience of IT organizations who can take advantage of the research performed under the Project VRC banner. Even more importantly the breadth and quality of information presented through Project VRC is acting to improve the quality and credibility of all server hosted desktop virtualization vendor issued performance benchmarks.
Now that Citrix have seen the light, I hope that all server hosted desktop virtualization vendors will follow suit and adopt Login VSI as their testing benchmark. Anyone who doesn’t should not be surprised if their performance data is called into question.
After being completely underwhelmed by the iPad launch, it
has fallen to Citrix of all companies to renew my enthusiasm for mobile
devices. A little over two years after Chris Fleck (Citrix VP of Community and
Solutions Development) first introduced me to the idea of using a smart phone
as a laptop replacement, Citrix announced this morning the latest iteration of
its Nirvana Phone concept.
The first iteration of the Nirvana Phone took at its core
idea the notion that the then current generation of smart phones (think first
generation iPhone) were approaching the level of performance needed to run the
Citrix Receiver successfully. If that was the case then with the addition of a
Bluetooth mouse and keyboard and a HD video out connection it would be quite
possible for your phone to become your always connected mobile thin client. Of
course it didn't escape attention that if this idea took off it would most
likely result in Citrix selling a few more XenApp and XenDesktop licenses.
Two years later we are still waiting for the Nirvana Phone,
all of the individual parts are available all that we are lacking is for
someone to assemble them all in a single compelling package, and that is where
today's announcement starts. Citrix working together with OK Labs (who I
mentioned in my last post) have released a reference architecture document
describing a second generation Nirvana Phone that builds on the core concept
but updates it to take into account the latest developments in mobile
hypervisor capabilities.
I have to stress the word concept, Citrix is most definitely not in the mobile handset
business (although OK Labs most definitely is, albeit in a very specialized
area). Think of this more as a conversation starter than a clear statement of
direction of things to come from Citrix.
The Nirvana Phone concept extends Citrix’s vision for mobile
application delivery beyond the point I described it in my last post. Instead
of writing a separate Citrix Receiver for each mobile device operating system,
the Nirvana Phone has at its heart the OK Labs OKL4 Microvisor, with the Citrix
Receiver implemented as what is in effect a virtual appliance running directly
on the hypervisor. This brings with it two key advantages; firstly Citrix could
now, in theory anyway, provide a single Citrix Receiver for use on all phones
running the OK Labs Microvisor (and that's a quite staggering 500 million
devices). Secondly by running the Citrix Receiver in its own virtual machine it
is significantly more secure than it would be when running alongside many other
applications. The second point might not be off too much concern today, but as the
number of open ecosystem App stores such as Cydia and the Android Market increases
so does the risk of malware gaining a foothold on smart phones. At some point
corporate IT will have to wake up to this risk and a secure Citrix Receiver may
be just the thing they are looking for to marry the needs of security with the
convenience of mobile applications.
Anyway, here's a short video of Chris Fleck demonstrating
the Nirvana phone.
How cool is that.
The demo is is real, there's no trickery involved here. That phone is a standard smartphone, although perhaps only recognizable if you are outside the US. Even so, I'm afraid you can't go out buy a working Nirvana Phone today. While the hardware is off the shelf, the firmware has been hacked somewhat to install the Citrix Receiver.
What are the chances that we will see a Nirvana Phone for sale any time soon? Well, the OKL4 Microvisor is embedded in smartphones such as the HTC G1, G2, and the HTC Hero, the Motorola Droid and Cliq, the Palm Pre, and the Toshiba TG01OK . Most significantly the OKL4 Microvisor powers the world's only commercially-available fully-virtualized smartphone, the Motorola Evoke QA4. So the core technology is already operational in the field, and it becomes a matter of detail to get the Citrix Receiver integrated with a production platform - that and find a mobile wireless operator interested in offering it as a service.
I almost forgot, Citrix and OK Labs are hosting a joint Webinar on the Nirvana Phone on February 9th.
Noted desktop virtualization evangelist Cooper Bulens has come down on the side of Unidesk's Composite Virtualization as his recommendation for managing desktop virtualization environments.
I'm thinking of asking Cooper if he would do they keynote at Catalyst US in San Diego in June. He's have to cut the product placement stuff to comply with Cataylst's rules, but we need to show leadership some fresh new ideas.
I don't appear to be able to step out of the house for an espresso at Peet's right now without hearing a jet-lagged English accent struggling with the difficulties of ordering a decent cup of tea (that would be the hot kind) while trying to explain the relationship between application management and contextual entitlement.
Or to put it another way, AppSense are packing their bags, leaving good old Blighty and moving to the Bay area.
With Sun, Wyse, RingCube and vmWare already well established here, Citrix's XenDesktop team getting settled in and now AppSense, pretty soon you won't be able to move round here for desktop virtualization talent.
InfoWorld's editors and contributors have ranked Desktop Virtualization as the second most important eemerging technology for 2009. Also highly ranked in the InfoWorld top 10 were I/O Virtualization and Data deduplication, both essential for controlling the CapEx and OpEx costs of server based virtualization.
Google are pitching Chrome OS as a fast netbook only access platform that will run web apps but offers no support for conventional apps (Windows, Mac OS, linux, Android etc.). It's designed for online use, with offline support limited to media playback, HTML 5 apps, and that's about it.
Wow! Errr... hang on a minute, can someone explain to me how the already overloaded US cell phone networks are going to support all the new traffic that this will create. We've all seen what has happened with AT&T and how the introduction of the iPhone has crippled parts of its network.
And then there's that small problem of 'legacy' application support, does Google think that this doesn't matter, or will there be an announcement from Citrix, VMware, and perhaps Wyse offering support for Chrome in a day or two. I'm talking to Citrix about the Citrix Receiver roadmap tomorrow, it will be interesting to get their take on the matter.
I received an interesting response to my previous post on XenDesktop 4 licensing from John Carey (Citrix Director of Licensing and Maintenance Programs). As not everyone reads comments I'm reproducing it below in full (all spelling errors can be put down to John writing this very late at night on an iPhone).
Simon, as always interesting and insightful comments. I'd like to clarify some potential misconceptions that have gained credence in the blogsphere. With the introduction of XenDesktop 4 and the User license model the XenDesktop product and subscription advantage pricing were actually revised downward. At the same time the existing limitations on application virtualization within XenDesktop were removed significantly increasing the value of the product to customers. The unshackling of XenApp in XenDesktop 4 IMO reframes the pricing conversation away from XenDesktop ccu and puts it in the context of XenApp ccu. XenDesktop 4 is highly discounted whn compared with XenApp (up to 50% lower SRP) We should also note that a single user of Xendesktop 4 is licensed to consume an unlimited number of virtual desktops and an unlimited number of virtual applications from an unlimited number of devices, online and offline. Citrix has also publicly stated our ongoing committment to invest in and innovate the XenApp product line sold exclusively under a concurrent user model. In fact for high concurrency use cases [ I think John means 'low concurrency' here] and remote access scenarios, Citrix continues to recommend XenApp sold under a concurrent user license model with its' published desktop feature, appliaction isolation and streaming features and (with the release of XenApp 5.0 Feature Pack 2) VM hosted applications feature. As for trade-up yes in a 2:1 scenario the SA renewal cost increases. However the per unit cost for SA is lower than XenApp, the increase is due to the doubling of licensed users available to XenApp customers at up to 80% savings on XenDesktop 4 SRP. Obvioulsy I'm invested in clarifying our position, I'm also conscious that customers have very real concerns around immediate cost and budget impacts of extending their virtual desktop deployment, Citrix continues to be invested in helping customers solve these and other challenges with the most cost effective and hi performance solution available in the market today.
John Carey
So to summarize.
Citrix reduced the price of XenDesktop licenses and Subscription Advantage as part of the transition to user based licensing, so that a XenDesktop 4 license is up to 50% less expensive than a comparable XenApp license
Citrix are continuing to look to ways to help customers with concerns about the cost of transitioning to the user based licensing model
XenApp will continue to use the concurrent user licensing model and Citrix is committed to continuing to develop the platform.
I confess that John's first point XenDesktop 4 licensing and SA price reduction has passed me by (I'm more driven by value than price). When you consider that a XenDesktop 4 can behalf the price of a XenApp 4 license,yet XD4 includes a XA license it becomes clear that those Citrix customers who have heavily invested in XenApp in the past and run at high concurrency might see a reduction in their Subscription Advantage costs. And it's clear from the second point that the story is not yet over, Citrix is continuing to look at ways to help retain customers like Mike Stanley.
In my previous post exploring licensing considerations for a VDI licensing model. I came to the conclusion that the concurrent usage licensing model had significant shortcomings compared to a user based model. However, there are other factors that need to be taken into consideration. While a private poll of 500 of Citrix's customers showed broad support for the XenDesktop 4 licensing model, Mike Stanley's previous comments highlight the two most important secondary factors that should have to be taken into consideration when deciding on the upgrade path.
The most visible of these issues is cost. Transition to user based licensing will inevitably result in an increase in the number of licenses required. While many (perhaps most) existing customers will be able to trade up to XenDesktop 4 for little immediate cost, the on-going Subscription Advantage commitment will be substantially more than their previous outlay. Introduction of a significant increase in licensing costs (even if it does not apply for another 12 months) is going to raise serious concerns and cause many customers to review their commitment to Citrix. I think that Citrix need to look closely at how this increase in Subscription Advantage fees will impact their customers and consider taking action to limit its impact. The global recession is still going to be depressing IT budgets for some time to come, and far sighted IT managers will be looking closely at what an increase in the number of licenses under Subscription Advantage will cost. Using a 2 for 1 upgrade path as a way to boost Subscription Advantage revenue is not going to be well received. A reduction in the unit cost of Subscription Advantage would be a welcome announcement at this time, not to mention prompt action to address the concerns of customers like Mike where a 2:1 conversion ratio is of very little benefit.
Which brings me to the second point: Trust. Mike asked a very important question in his previous comments.
Why buy into an expensive XenApp solution today, knowing that the next version may switch to per user licensing ...
Mike Stanley
Now that the door to user based licensing has been opened, Mike is just one of many asking what next for XenApp. Personally I don't see Citrix making any changes here. They had the opportunity once when off-line Application Streaming was introduced but didn't take it, acting to do so now is most unlikely. Having said that, I do think that Citrix have a problem here. Just as Citrix and Microsoft are seeing greater adoption of XenServer and Hyper-V as VMware's customers becoming disaffected with their licensing practices, Citrix need to ensure that they do not loose market share to competition in the application and desktop delivery space. A clear message to reassure customers that the XenApp licensing model is not going to change would be most welcome.
