Fun cartoon from Quest explaining desktop virt (and of course their products)

Quest just released this cartoon explaining desktop virtualization, their products, and how they fit with Microsoft. It's pretty fun!

Quest just released this cartoon explaining desktop virtualization, their products, and how they fit with Microsoft. It's pretty fun!

My only beef with it is that in the very first sentence, they imply that desktop virtualization = VDI. :( Also I noticed that when they showed vWorkspace plugging into multiple hypervisors, they showed a four-piece puzzle but only actually plugged in ESX, Hyper-V, and Parallels. (Yet they also support XenServer, so why didn't that fit in Slot #4? Do they really not like Citrix that much?)

But other than that, fun stuff! This is actually a pretty effective way to explain desktop virtualization in general. Nice!

Join the conversation

5 comments

Send me notifications when other members comment.

Please create a username to comment.

vWorkspace does not natively support XenServer... By this I mean it can't provision or power manage VM's running on it (unless there is a top secret Xenserver edition).


I also don't think they imply that DV = VDI... I think they imply that people think DV = VDI but with vWorkspace it's so much more, etc etc etc...


Desktop Virtualization marketing video of the year goes to Quest! Good stuff.


Cancel

Nope, there is not secret XenServer edition :-) and the reason we do not support XenServer is not because we dislike Citrix. It is simply because we do not see any customer demand for it. It must have something to do with the fact that most XenServer customers typically choose that other desktop virtualization product....


On the awesome cartoon (I know I am not objective but I still think it is cool), does anyone kind of recognize the soundtrack? It is slightly different but still it stands out. Disclaimer - you will reveal something about yourself if you do :-)


Cancel

The reason they don't support XenServer is because Quest doesn't get to play in scaled implementations where ESX is the clear leader. That's where Citrix or View play typically.  Hyper-V does not scale for desktop virt and is a PIA to configure for storage etc, but makes a lot of sense for Quest to play on top of because they are focused/get traction in the SMB IMO for the most part. It also helps Quest with their marriage to RemoteFX which is going nowhere strategy. As a result things like Intellicache can't be supported with Quest. Also that cloud thing means a problem for Quest as that's mostly Xen/RedHat, and I predict will stay that way given the move toward open XXX AKA see OpenStack. Goes back to my belief that to win in desktop virt, you have to own a hypervisor in order to add features to improve your stack. Without it it's very hard, unless you are doing something very different like Kaviza that again is SMB focused so not a broad play. It's a feature in a bigger ecosystem IMO.


Cancel

@Appdetective - I think Michel gave a reason for why they don't support XenServer.  Why doubt him?


I personally spoke to a Citrix Field Engineer who admitted that XenServer's traction is zero to non-existent.  The majority of XenDesktop implementations are on top of ESX.  Moreover, I wholeheartedly disagree that in order to be a serious player in the desktop virtualization market, you must own a hypervisor.  After all, desktop virtualization is not always a hypervisor-dependent proposition.  If a customer likes a particular vendor's VDI product, why shoehorn that same vendor's hypervisor into the solution?  It's all about choices, and if Quest wanted to be a hypervisor vendor, they could have acquired another Xen product whose bits and pieces were acquired by Oracle not too long ago.  This is like saying that in order to be a leader in platform management, you also have to own the platform that's being managed.  Very shortsighted view of the world!


Cancel

@edgeseeker I don't doubt him as it stands today, which is tiny % of desktops in the enterprise virtualized. As you scale, the ESX costs become too high and hence IMO this will result in other hypervisors which includes Hyper-V, XEN etc. Both of these are doing things in the hypervisor to optimize for their workload. This to me is the direction they are all going to go. This means the cross platform notion will also mean least common denominator. So picking a solution that supports all the major hypervisors is going to be for smart customers. As more cloud workloads appear, they will use more open hypervisors as those service providers will not want the cost of ESX. Hyper-V with mean an Azure lock in strategy.


I'm not trying to imply that Quest still can't be relevant, but IMO without the hypervisor they are at the mercy of what the platform vendors will let them do. Hence I think Quest will remain focused on SMB as enterprise will figure out they just don't have the firepower to compete. Hence why they are a distant #3/4 player in the market today.


Cancel

-ADS BY GOOGLE

SearchVirtualDesktop

SearchEnterpriseDesktop

SearchServerVirtualization

SearchVMware

Close