Brian Madden - All Comments

Using HP RGS with VMware View 3.1 « VM Junkie

Using HP RGS with VMware View 3.1 « VM Junkie — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 23:31:47 GMT

Pingback from Using HP RGS with VMware View 3.1 « VM Junkie

re: The first “real” layering product? MokaFive’s new v2.0 looks pretty good!

Purnima Padmanabhan — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 22:42:02 GMT

@Chetan

MokaFive key value proposition is in providing central cloud based management with the power of local execution, therefore the focus on client based hypervisors. Architecturally, the MokaFive solution is designed to be platform and hypervisor agnostic, be it Type 1 client hypervisor, Type 2 client hypervisor, baremetal or a server hypervisor (such as ESX). We have focused initially on Type 2 since it addresses the immediate customer needs around secure mobile access and enabling platform choice for users.

We will be blogging more on this topic in the coming weeks. Stay tuned at http://mokafive.blogspot.com

re: The first “real” layering product? MokaFive’s new v2.0 looks pretty good!

dougdooley — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 21:17:21 GMT

@Shanetech

OK, I changed my avatar to something less scary (I hope). BTW, that other cartoon avatar was one of the stock ones that everyone can choose from when you create a profile here.

That said, I can see why you might be creeped out by it. When I was a kid, I was scared of Mr. Rogers (non-threating but yet still creepy). That avatar was like the Mr. Rogers of avatars.

;-)

re: Oracle buys Sun. Is there a desktop virtualization angle here?

kirk — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 20:24:48 GMT

Brian,

You crack me up. Your so called "title" at the top of your blog states "Your independent source for application and desktop virtualization" and you actually consider yourself a "desktop virtualization expert" in your bio.

How can you possibly classify yourself as this if you haven't even examined all avenues of desktop virtualization? It is becoming very clear that you are not diverse in all products, but rather very opinionated and apparently close-minded to certain vendors.

Even I, someone who is not even a Sun advocate, know more about Sun Rays that you apparently do.

If you want to judge products, you should try them out first, or at least do the proper research. Based on previous comments and your assessment of Sun Rays, you have not given a proper cause for your dislike of the product. You're completely in the wrong and you did not support your argument.

Next time, try showing a valuable argument with supporting numbers. Seems to me that you're just one of "those" guys who doesn't want to deviate from anything but what you are familiar with.

Sad....

re: The first “real” layering product? MokaFive’s new v2.0 looks pretty good!

Shawn Bass — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 20:22:23 GMT

@Shane -

No implementations yet. I just like to keep my eyes on all the players in this industry. Still having a heck of a time getting to work with some of them though (not MokaFive).

Shawn

re: The first “real” layering product? MokaFive’s new v2.0 looks pretty good!

Shanetech — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 14:32:25 GMT

@ Shawn,

Thats cool, just was wondering if there were any real implementations you have done and what the primary focus of that business unit might have been because I have been thinking about where that might fit at the company I work at.

Cheers,

Shane

re: Is standard RDP 7 ready for everyday desktop replacement? I’m on a mission to find out!

Brian Madden — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 14:27:40 GMT

Re: LAN testing only, I guess then really that this is just a start. I still want to use RDP over the LAN for awhile, and then I can switch to a cloud desktop, and then I can try some other protocols.

My point for wanting to test RDP was simply to see how good it was in box.. so just sort of as the baseline.

Regarding desktop replacement being LAN only, I guess I should clarify that I mean desktop replacement with RDP as the protocol. I think there will probably be a lot of people who run desktops from the cloud, but I doubt many of them will do it via RDP. (Or maybe they will? Dunno.. we'll see how well this experiment goes I guess.)

re: Is standard RDP 7 ready for everyday desktop replacement? I’m on a mission to find out!

Tim Mangan — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 13:59:20 GMT

Accessing UDP devices that require drivers, like scanners, can be a real pain. This is why you have things like "virtual channels" in both RDP and ICA so that a vendor can install the driver remotely and "forward" whatever is needed to the app running on the server. Your site also advertises a vendor that does a general solition for ICA, but it is pricey.

We eventually need this stuff baked into the protocols, eliminating the need for any driver on the client, in order to achieve mass deployment of VDI.

re: Is standard RDP 7 ready for everyday desktop replacement? I’m on a mission to find out!

appdetective — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 13:58:32 GMT

Shawn, it's good to know that real world torture is teaching us similar lessons :-)

re: Is standard RDP 7 ready for everyday desktop replacement? I’m on a mission to find out!

Shawn Bass — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 13:37:34 GMT

/me beginning to wonder if I'm sleep-commenting under an alias since appdetective keeps posting pretty much everything I'm thinking. Get out of my head dude! ;)

re: The first “real” layering product? MokaFive’s new v2.0 looks pretty good!

Shawn Bass — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 13:35:28 GMT

@shanetech,

"Where the real value of a managed Type-1 or Type-2 solution is frequently disconnected remote users (aka laptops). This is where you'll see many companies adopt a Type-1/Type-2 solution."

Couldn't have said it better myself. No wait ;)

re: Is standard RDP 7 ready for everyday desktop replacement? I’m on a mission to find out!

appdetective — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 13:23:22 GMT

It would be helpful to clarify why you believe Desktop replacement will be LAN based? Do you really believe people who invest in Hosted Virtual Desktops will build local datacenters or have local Clouds, or never have their users travel? WAN is everything, if the protocol can't do that well, it's an extreme limitation. Try POoIP in the real world and see how you do.

re: Is standard RDP 7 ready for everyday desktop replacement? I’m on a mission to find out!

InforMed Direct — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 08:12:41 GMT

Shame on your Brian! Until you use ICA/RDP 24/7 for accessing remote desktop or terminal server, you cannot fully appreciate the problems with the environment. Yes, they are niggles, but niggles have a nasty habit of joining together to cause a big problem. This is why I'm still dubious about VDI because the pressure within our organisation to dump Citrix XenApp is purely because of these niggles you mention plus the fact that without a combo like HDX, the user experience will *always* be worse to some degree.

Cheers, Rob.

re: The first “real” layering product? MokaFive’s new v2.0 looks pretty good!

Shanetech — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 01:54:53 GMT

1) Great to see Chetan on here bringing another view and asking questions

2) Doug Dooley's name and avatar scares me but man the guy does make some good points

3) @ Shawn, Where do you see a technology vendor like MokaFive providing the most benefit to your customers?

re: The first “real” layering product? MokaFive’s new v2.0 looks pretty good!

Shawn Bass — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 23:12:12 GMT

@chetan - My guess is that they went with Type-2 because it eliminates most of the driver difficulties. Type-1 is great from a performance and security perspective, but it's also much harder as you need to have driver compatibility with a billion different types of hardware, etc. Or you just keep a limited HCL. Hey it worked for VMware in the server space. But PC/laptop market is a bit harder.

@doug - While you are correct that MokaFive isn't the first layering approach, I wouldn't go so far as to directly compare MokaFive to RingCube. MokaFive is built on top of VMware Player and therefore is an instruction set or hardware virtualization layer. RingCube is a bit closer to an Application / OS Virtualization layer whereby it's still dependent on a common underlying OS (i.e. you can't run a MojoPac virtual environment on top of a different operating system version). MojoPac also has limitations from a security perspective in that you're at the mercy of the integrity of the underlying OS. While MokaFive and any other type-2 solution has somewhat of a similar security risk, they are somewhat insulated by the nature of the VM running instruction set virtualization (well a little isolated as there's still several points of security concern). Anyway, keep in mind that layering and user customization isn't low hanging fruit in the VDI space. There's plenty of ways to achieve user customization in VDI. Where the real value of a managed Type-1 or Type-2 solution is frequently disconnected remote users (aka laptops). This is where you'll see many companies adopt a Type-1/Type-2 solution. Me? I've still got reservations in several areas, but that's a topic a BriForum session in three weeks ;)

Shawn