Persistent or non-persistent VDI? A debate between industry experts from VMworld 2013

Listen to this podcast

Which VDI deployment strategy is the best, persistent or non-persistent? For years, we've been stating that the persistent approach is more appropriate in situations, mainly because RDSH is equally appropriate in situations where non-persistent VDI could be used.

Which VDI deployment strategy is the best, persistent or non-persistent? For years, we've been stating that the persistent approach is more appropriate in situations, mainly because RDSH is equally appropriate in situations where non-persistent VDI could be used. VMware has traditionally argued in favor of non-persistent VDI, which Brian recently called them out on. The argument has dulled slightly as technology has matured enough to bring density numbers more in line with each other (meaning you can support a similar number of desktops on like-hardware in either RDSH or non-persistent VDI scenarios), but there are still issues of complexity, management, infrastructure, and cost that make this a wildly divisive topic.

During the conference, Gunnar Berger organized a debate between two people in favor of persistent VDI–Andre Leibovici & Shawn Bass, and two people that prefer non-persistent VDI–Jason Langone and Jason Mattox. We're always happy to have this conversation, so we agreed to post the podcast after the show was over. Check it out and let us know what you think! VMware's EUC CTO Scott Davis and Brian Madden were both in attendance, no doubt biting their tongues as long as they could :)

 

2 comments

Oldest 

Forgot Password?

No problem! Submit your e-mail address below. We'll send you an email containing your password.

Your password has been sent to:

-ADS BY GOOGLE

SearchVirtualDesktop

SearchEnterpriseDesktop

SearchServerVirtualization

SearchVMware

Close