What if VMware bought Citrix? Would Microsoft care?

There's been a lot of talk over the past year or so about someone buying Citrix, with rumors ranging from Cisco to IBM to HP to Oracle. And then of course there's the [now] decades old rumor that Microsoft might buy Citrix.

There's been a lot of talk over the past year or so about someone buying Citrix, with rumors ranging from Cisco to IBM to HP to Oracle. And then of course there's the [now] decades old rumor that Microsoft might buy Citrix. Douglas Brown and Jeff Pitsch have both written about this recently, with their consensus being that while there's no real reason for Microsoft to buy Citrix, if another competitor tried to buy Citrix, Microsoft might step in to buy them defensively.

This is what I thought for a long time as well, and in fact this is what I told a lot of people at VMworld last week when I was asked about Microsoft buying Citrix. But now, I'm not so sure. I'm not sure that Microsoft needs to buy Citrix--even defensively.

The main reason is I don't think Microsoft would care. What does Microsoft need Citrix for today? Microsoft would still get their TSCAL and VECD licensing revenue no matter who owned Citrix. (After all, Windows isn't going away anytime soon .) And now that Microsoft has Hyper-V and SCVMM, they don't need Citrix as much on that front too. And don't forget that Microsoft has been making a lot of their own acquisitions in the last few years, like Softricity, Calista, and Kidaro.

So I think Microsoft would be fine no matter who (if anyone) buys Citrix.

VMware + Citrix?

At the suggestion of VMware buying Citrix (or the two companies merging or whatever), most peoples' first thoughts are, "That is crazy and you are an idiot for suggesting it." But just think about it for a minute before dismissing it. VMware and Microsoft are huge competitors. Citrix and Microsoft are more and more becoming competitors. What if VMware and Citrix teamed up to become THE platform for VDI+? They could become the "new Citrix." (I mean "new Citrix" in the context of how Citrix's relationship has been to Microsoft over the past decade... This partnership is what VMwareCitrix could create.)

Think about their products. VMwareCitrix could (would?) absolutely dominate the space. You take the crazy fragmented market now of VMware, Citrix, Microsoft, Quest, Symantec, Ericom, Leostream, and about 50 other companies you never heard of, and you get THE force in the industry. VMwareCitrix could combine Citrix Provisioning Server (fka "Ardence") with VMware ESX with Citrix's connection broker with VMware's offline VM capability and vClient with Citrix's connection devices with VMware's vCenter with Citrix's ICA protocol.

I'd buy into that product!

What about Citrix's XenSource purchase and XenServer? I still think Xen is dead in the long term and that people will go to KVM, especially now that Red Hat owns Qumranet.

Of course Simon Crosby would probably be out, because he's been pretty harsh on VMware for the past year. Then again, VMware has a few openings in the R&D and product management departments, and they could probably use another chief scientist, so maybe there are some good opportunities for Simon?

But VMwareCitrix. Think about it. I can think of worse things, you know? Each of these companies has half a solution today, and they're each working on getting the whole solution. But long term, they're both going to be creamed by Microsoft since Microsoft has a monopoly on the desktop OS, so why not combine now on your own terms instead of in a fire sale way in three years.

How much would Citrix cost? Where would VMware get the money?

I don't know and I don't know--that's not my department. But Citrix was up 5% yesterday at 4x the normal call volume. ;)

Join the conversation

69 comments

Send me notifications when other members comment.

By submitting you agree to receive email from TechTarget and its partners. If you reside outside of the United States, you consent to having your personal data transferred to and processed in the United States. Privacy

Please create a username to comment.

not gossip, inuendo, what ifs, how much, etc


very disappointed

Cancel

Brian I am a fan of your but were you drunk writing this?. This article is very disappointing too much of what the other guest said" not gossip, inuendo, what ifs, how much, etc"

Cancel
What were you thinking whilst writing this!? i thought this was a technical website not a sales/rumor starting one. the shamee
Cancel

Don't you still find technical info here?  I know that I do and so do many others.  I don't write technical stuff for this site, because I told Brian and Gabe that they pretty much had this covered.  So does that mean that you don't read what I write on how to get your projects funded or how to get your agenda pushed through your companies, or my take on what is going on in the industry?  I won't be crushed if you say no, so be honest.

You all certainly have rights to your own opinions and I will be the first to fight for those rights, but what is wrong with looking forward and actually getting our industry to think about "what might happen if".  We are all very passionate about this technology and potential shifts in the landscape affect us all.  Folks, we have to look up from our monitors once in a while and actually pay attention to what is going on. I still (believe it or not) look to this site for great forums and reviews from Brian, Gabe, Tim, Ruben, etc, but I also look for what these guys have to say as thought leaders in this industry.  

I'm not going to speak for Brian as he is more than capable of defending his posts by himself, but as someone who doesn't write technical content, I'm shocked at your response to a post that actually makes sense, albeit with a lot of questions as to how that might work and what it would do to your jobs.  I can tell you that when I sit with Brian and others in this industry and talk about this it is some of the best conversations that I have.

What I'm saying is give Brian a break, there is still a TON of technical content on this site and if you don't see that, well then you're blind.  There is nothing wrong with taking a "big picture" look and sharing thoughts about what is going on now and what might happen in the future.  You do know that this is still a blog and a forum to put your thoughts and opinions up.  Citrix does the same thing on their site, VMware does the same thing on theirs, what is wrong with Brian doing it? If you don't like what is there, reply and give your opinion and thoughts like you did here.  This is what sparks conversation and we are all better for having more of those.

Cheers guys

Michael

Cancel

Kudos Brian for actually executing something on this site as a blog rather than a technical knowledge source. Your opinions are sought after (whether appreciated or not ;-) ), and emotional content always drives visitors.


Your friendly neighborhood Microtrixware analyst.


Well done!

Cancel

But where would VMware get $8 billion to pay for Citrix? Do you think Citrix shareholders would accept Vmware's stock, knowing that Vmware's future is so uncertain?


Cancel

Been a fan for years, good site, good article. I know it's a great what if BUT what if. I'm not a M$ basher but this would certainly start to make them think about the monopoly they have. We use Vmware on ESX, Citrix on Micosoft  on ± 2000 servers (not counting AIX, zOS and our mainframes) and must say M$ has failed to impress me for a couple of years now (not counting the Marketing division) but a Vmwix (got excited there) would raise eybrows.

 

Herman

Cancel
The quicker you guys turn off the guest functionality the better.  I wouldn't take half of these comments seriously when it comes to bashing the content of this site.

I have seen BM and DB get so much flak recently for essentially giving away free knowledge, vision and interesting / controversial opinions.

It is obvious that popularity comes at a price, and the above article is incredibly relevant to the community and so are the discussion threads, so grow some balls and discuss with some transparency.

Keep up the good work.

Lee
Cancel
No problems
Cancel
CTXS stock is up on rumors of being acquired.  Often times, I wonder if people start this crap just to get a speculative boost on their shares.  I know Brian doesn't own CTXS stock, so I know it's not him doing it, but other people out there.  I just don't know.  As far as VMware acquiring Citrix, I just don't see it.  With VMware having a market cap of only a few billion more than Citrix and with VMware stock plumetting recently due to missing earnings, etc. I can't imagine them saying "Hey let's scrape up 8 billion and buy Citrix".  There's no doubt they need a better remoting protocol, and it seems (at least from VMworld) they believe they've found it in Teradici.  So apparently VMware has joined the crowd of out of touch companies that think that VDI over the WAN is niche. *sigh*
Cancel

First...lighten up, its a blog - Brian's entitled to write whatever he wants and there is oodles of technical info on the site.

Second...It does kind of make sense...there has been a lot of turnover with senior VMWare executives.  VMWare buys Citrix for there senior management to help develop and grow the business?  I think Citrix has done a really good job at that in the last 3 years with their acquisions of companies for Xen, NetScaler, WANScaler, etc....Could work, it will be interesting to see!

Cancel
As others have noted, this is a blog, not strictly a technical encyclopedia.  Brian is just thinking out loud and I appreciate that.  I'll never get that from Citrix, VMware, or Microsoft at their website.  The question is: would Microsoft stop sharing information that had previously been shared with Citrix.  Is Microsoft eager to get Citrix out of the picture?
Cancel
Maybe Brian can write a blog titled "What If Monkey's Fell Out My Ass".  It would have the same relevant content.
Cancel

I saw Simon Crosby speak in Denver yesterday.  I dont get the impression Xen is going away. What I cant figure out is the relationship with Microsoft.  According to Microsoft and Citrix they are going to pump each others products.   Short term I understand this, but when Hyper-V is fully functional I do not get the relationship at all.  


I believe you will see huge marketing this year pushing Xen and Hyper-V.  The tag line will be why pay so much for VMware.  Microsoft was specifically communicating wait and save your money, Vmware is not a long term investment.


My 2cents is that both Citrix Xen and Microsoft need to prove there products if they want a bigger share of the pie.  I dont run VMware for all the bells and whistles I run it because it is stable.  Xen and Hyper-V may be just as stable but I want to see broad industry/community support before I sink some money into them. 


If anybody was at Iforum 3 years ago when every presentor was using
Virtual Server 2005, you know what I am talking about.  I walked out of that confernce  saying that product would never be used in my shop.  As for Citrix Xen they didnt even support Windows hosts a few years ago.  If they think there product is is now cherry,  they need to really push this information out.   The last time I spoke with and SE on Xen Server I wasn't getting warm fuzzies. 


This was all several years ago so I am now willing to re-evalute the situation.   What Citrix needs to remember and Microsoft knows,  if you win the engineers you will win the war.

Cancel

Now that really had me laughing......but the question is.......how did the Monkeys get there? :)


Brian: I appreciate you, your technical stuff and "what if" scenarios. Just ignore the peanut gallery and keep up the great work!


Citrix, VMWare, MS, and others do not want to be accountable or up front. This site exposes things the software manufacturers do not disclose themseves. It does not let them get away with their propaganda marketing.


Full Disclosure is integrity! Let the Buyer Beware!

Cancel
Will you promise to reveal your identity and admit how stupid you are if this unlikely event ever materializes and this article proves to be of historic nature?
Cancel
Over the past few months, I’ve watched as Brian has spewed more of this garbage into the blogosphere; none of it helping or evolving the community.  I believe we’re starting to witness the flame out of BM just as we’ve quietly watched DAB go from “industry leader” to “industry loser”.  I can only assume that in Brian’s desperation to avoid the same fate, he spreads this filth just to garnish the proceeds from his site sponsors and ads.  Personally, I see you as a liability to the industry as well as the companies within.  I welcome the day that MarkT cuts you off from any inside knowledge and then perhaps finally, all of us with vested interest can watch you crash & burn.
Cancel
You have my word and I'll reveal how the monkeys got there too.
Cancel

I honestly think you're the biggest loser of all. I think this article holds a lot of merit. Brian wrote yet another 'WHAT IF', no-nonsense article, a clear testament to his brilliant thinking. I believe he has had a major hand in mobilizing this community over the years, turning this industry into a 'nice place to live'.


What have you done apart from being jealous and manifesting your hate, Mr. GUEST?

Cancel

Being in an executive position within our business, I find the overall content of Brian's site excellent. Brian is catering to not only the IT intellects for technical knowledge but also to the executives whose primary business focus is not necessarily on the technical nuts and bolts / functionality of software and solutions, but rather, on the core value propositions / opportunities / companies stratetigic positioning now and possibly in the near future, holds. Sure, the topic of this article is a potential hypothetic. However, never say never as this is a cut throat market and executives may make decisions relative to what is best for the business overall. Brian, your thoughts, technical feedback and general appreciation for having the website posted for all to view and interact with is greatly appreciated!! Thanks. I always look forward to your website postings.


Laura Armstrong, VP desktopsites Inc.

Cancel
I personally and professionally hope this happens, as we (at Quest) would become Microsoft's number one ISV overnight.

As for getting Citrix' connection broker, I wouldn't wish that upon anyone, as that is the most horrible and useless piece of crap i've seen (at least from the console perspective). but if VMware's history dictates their future, they would acquire Citrix for XenDesktop, as they already purchased two connection brokers and still have a broker that is "nothing special".

Citrix is good for ICA and Ardence, but the administration of any of their products is.....

These guys would be perfect for eachother, so i'll start arranging the engagement party and buying the wedding gifts now.
Cancel

Not sure I'd call that poster a loser or a jealous hater, more like telling it like it is.  This what if posting by Brian isn't founded on any solid evidence, just like his and DAB's postings about the purchase of Citrix by Microsoft and serves no purpose but to amplify the volatility in the stock price that is based on these unprofessionally motivated rumors.


If you want to read some speculative garbage, stick to the rags at the supermarket check-out counter.  I expect better out of Brian and you should too.

Cancel
Honestly Patrick, you used to have some class. What happened? At least, you appeared to be a classy guy in the past. Do you believe in karma?
Cancel

I think deriding Brian's article as filth and garbage smacks of jealousy. If you want filth I can point you to some blogs that are riddled with it.  


Brian, nice out-of-the-box thinking. Vmware has a solid back end, which is being used to sell a sub-par VDI solution. Combining Citrix technology with VMware would greatly bolster the solution. I do wonder if a purchase could be done financially. I'm not a financial guy, but could a merger be less of a financial risk bringing the same benefit?

Cancel

Dude, seriously, get over this subject, i mean really this is getting boring. Feels like you have nothing to write about and this is all you can come up with. What happened to the great articles of the past. every week you are either commenting or writing about Citrix and something to do with it getting bought. Let it go already.


 Give us some cool articles like the ICA login process, something interesting

Cancel
Michael, we know you recently started blogging here and even though you say you are a Citrix guru we have yet to see any GURU in your articles. So please you wrote an entire article in the comments section. Try writing something more interesting in your actual blogs because so far it has been disapointing
Cancel
Sadly, I can't disclose who I am or what I do but I can assure you I'm neither jealous or manifesting hate. And calling me a loser is rather laughable -- (if you only knew).  Interestingly enough, I agree with you that he had a hand in mobilizing this community and it has been very generous to me.  However, I along with thousands of my collegues with many years of experience in the industry believe his time has past.  Ever ask yourself why he's not posting that much technical information anymore?  I think someone is out of favor with his elders & needs to be slapped around as he's obviously forgotten his place.  Like Brian, I wrote a "WHAT IF", no-nonsense reply, which also happens to be a clear testiment to my brilliance.
Cancel
Agreed. It will probably have to be driven by EMC.
Cancel

Why even take the time out to make this comment if Brian's content repulses you so much? Typically people write comments and unwittingly expose issues within their own personality and maturity level.

Cancel
What's the emoticon for rolling your eyes and sighing loudly?
Cancel

I think Brian's article is very interesting. You should particularly find it interesting if you look at it from the standpoint of how it could impact your career.


Not all articles need to be geeky and technical.

Cancel

you obviously are a person that has no bearing on decision making in your organization.  So no, my posts wouldn't interest you at all.  Which I'm cool with.  As far as my expertise goes, I don' have to defend my many years of experience in this industry or in this technology to anyone who won't identify themselves in posts.  I made it perfectly clear that I don't write technical stuff.  If that's what you want, then read someone else's stuff.


Thanks for responding though man, but sack up or shut up.

Cancel
My last post was classless, and I should have engaged the filter between my mind and keyboard. I have friends at Citrix and VMware, and surely didn't intend to insult anyone. I probably did, so I officially opologize.

See, that was easy.
Cancel

I think Patrick is simply showing his competitive nature. I'm sure he's very passionate about what Quest is doing with their products, and we all know Patrick is pretty accomplished technically. Brian himself has mentioned on more than one occasion that Quest's VDI product is a couple of years ahead of its competition. I don't see anything wrong in what Patrick has said. His post clearly reflects the reality of the products he mentioned by name. We've all voiced our complaints about the same things in the past (multiple consoles, lack of features, etc).


Keep it up, Patrick. No need to drink the KoolAid.

Cancel
apologize. spellcheck would have helped too...
Cancel

Yeah, and at least he used his real name.. Classy or not, he's not afraid to say "These are my opinions."

So I'm cool with that...

Cancel
Why don't you write something? Here's one web site that keeps you coming back for more. Techie stuff is all around you. If you can't tolerate an insightful article like that, I've sure we can find you a shrink. We already know your alter-ego is GUEST. Who's the real you?
Cancel

Please don't feed the trolls, it only encourages them.  

It's like laughing at an 2 year old that just wet his pants.  

In this case, an anonymous 2 year old that just wet his keyboard. 

Cancel

As the great George Carlin had a great line, in regard to someone bitching about what someone was saying on the radio.  He said (and I'm paraphrasing here)... "There are two little knobs on your radio.  One turns down the volume, and the other one shuts it off." 


In other words, if you don't like the content on this site... stop looking at it, or stop coming here altogether.  No one is forcing you to read the content, and no one is even thinking of charging you for it.  Unless of course you just like to *** about free stuff... then keep at it... I guess.

Cancel

I don't believe VMware has the capital to pull this deal off.  HP or Symantec on the other hand...


Personally I would love to see HP or Symantec go for Citrix if anyone.  The Altiris Product line from Symantec married with Citrix components would make for some interesting desktop management. HP could leverage Citrix hardware and software into their servers and workstations and really be an industry force.


I'm not laying any bets though that any of this would happen anytime soon. As Shawn points out when the VDI bubble bursts because people realize the infrastructure doesn't warrant it Citrix is going to have to change course.  They may be ripe then. Just my opinion.


Jim Kenzig
http://www.techblink.com


 

Cancel

Jim,


Why do you think VDI is a bubble? Your insights are always appreciated.

Cancel

When you win the engineers you win the war? Totally wrong!


Novell won over all the engineers and tech people. Novell put on technical conferences and spent time in the server rooms with the IT guys. MS was out on the golf course with the CEOs and CIOs. MS won the war because the true final authority decision makers are the people on top. MS won the Network OS war with Novell.


5-10 years ago: Bill Gates invites the Fortune 25 CEOs to his house for a summit. You sell on all levels but you sell the strategy to the final authority decision makers.

Cancel

I pride my organization(Cuyahoga County Public Library) and myself in being early adopters of technology. I've been into computers and part of the computer industry since the early 80's. I've got excited about a lot of technologies and have embraced them. I've never called myself an analyst and I am not a vendor or have any kind of agenda.  I have no sponsors to be loyal to (though I do have my favorites when it comes to vendors and give them allegiance but that is only because they have proved their ability to deliver what they claim infalliby to my organization.)

 I manage a good size network with over 1500 workstations at 29 locations accessed by over 6 million different people of all ages at any given time. I have to get it right when I choose a technology or my organization is very public.

 We have only recently gone to gigabit speed ethernet, up until the last few years it wasnt even a reality to afford these types of speeds. 

Reason number one I won't buy into VDI.  Licensing.  Microsoft has got extremely greedy on this.  It isn't enough that you have to purchase the initial OS license (which has to be purchased via software assurance meaning you have to keep paying Microsoft a fee to keep using AND you CAN'T use it anymore IF you stop paying it) but they insist you must also purchase a VECD license for each copy of the software.  This is beyond the initial cost of the VDI software, server software, management software etc.  I priced out what it would cost just for software and needed servers in my organization for a VDI solution and it came out to be over a Million dollars!  This is no BS. 1 MILLION DOLLARS!  Then I have to spend another half million on  workstations or thin clients and printers. THEN I Have to KEEP paying Microsoft to maintain this setup. My reply was What are you nuts? 

I buy hardware(pc's) on a 3 year amortization plan.  They aren't that much more expensive than thin clients now a days and I've been the thin client route and it didn't work for us. WHen I buy a PC the OS comes with it right? So why should I get software assurance. MS isn't going to have another OS out for 3 more years and even if they do it won't run on the current PC's I have because they always up the power/memory needs of the next version. So when I buy my next round of PC's they will have the latest OS on them whatever it is. I am up to date and so is my hardware and I am not shelling out money to Microsoft every year and never owning the OS.  CEO's take note of this.

Phew: Maybe I need to do a blog posting about this. Reason number 2. I can't say it any better then this guy:  

http://www.linux-mag.com/id/7015

I nodded my head through this entire article.  Now what do I think will work? Citrix Provisioning and LIKE technologies bit only in limited cases.  Why. The OS is a one to one ratio to the PC and using MS's new licensing on virtual machines you don't need a VECD license if you buy the business or ultimate version on your desktops. It will take me about 2 servers to implement it and I can use my existing workstations. Licensing would cost me around $80,000 dollars.  So let's go $100,000 total solution. That is far cry from 1 million! And what is the difference? The licensing.  Microsoft is killing VDI before it is ever off the ground.  For what reason they have to do this I do not know but I wish they would wake up.   I've typed enough on Brians site.  I'll blog about this some day. 

Jim

Cancel

I agree, if you don't like the TV program, change the channel.


I come here for the views of people with experience... it's a blog for christ sake! In my opinion, every view is related to technology. Some directly, some indirectly.

Cancel

I should of said the Licensing and the extra 30 to 50 servers I would need to run VDI in that last paragraph. ... my mind races and my blood boils when I start talking about this stuff LOL.

Jim

Cancel

When you get this many posts to an article you have authored, you are doing something right !!! Keep up the healthy debate/speculation/insight/market movements/technical info/business value of solutions.


At the end of the day it keeps us all in jobs.

Cancel

In situations where you are comfortable with technology X (in Jim's case "Citrix") there is no need to look at VDI.  It is those companies that only deliver 15-25% of their applications and desktops via Server Based Computing technology, and struggle to support the myriad of workstation hardware and OS builds that really benefit from VDI.


For those that are completely comfortable delivering a majority of their apps via TS, and have several engineers that can completely support the environment, VDI may not be appealing.


That my friends is a gigantic minority, as most companies have one or two TS/Citrix admins and everyone else things it's voodo magic.  These companies are likely already virtualizing their servers, so they don't need to hire specialized staff to manage the servers that host the virtualized desktops.  The benefit from VDI is that the entire desktop support team can manage the virtual desktops, as they are running XP Pro or Vista.


Sure there are other technologies that may complicate these, i.e. Ardence or Application Virtualization, but even though these are complicating, they are not as complicated as TS/Citrix.


So Jim while I agree that there are companies like yours that have been entrenched in SBC since forever, you're in the extreme minority, as most companies are clueless when it comes to TS/Citrix, and salivate at the opportunity to replace/supplement it with something that the IT generalist understands.


It would be nice if MSFT VECD Licensing were not in existence, but it is, and the benefits of VDI outweigh the small negative of this licensing cost, which is not that much per user, compared to the yearly support for each user of a PC.


The great thing is that people have lots of choices, and are not being forced to use one specific technology, there is TS/Citrix, VDI, OS Streaming to the client, client hypervisors, desktop imaging solutions, application virtualization....   

Cancel
Thanks for the great post Jim, and the link to the linux-mag article... I nodded along with you. ;)
Cancel

As for getting Citrix' connection broker, I wouldn't wish that upon anyone, as that is the most horrible and useless piece of crap i've seen (at least from the console perspective).


Maybe you should try basing your opinions on end user 'usability' and not an admins perspective.  Companies don't purchase software to make their admins feel warm and comfy, they base their decisions to a large extent on end user productivity.


I use XD daily now, with provisioining, and it rocks. No doubt your stuff rocks too...but do I care?


Interesting that you think XD is 'a horrible and useless piece of crap', and VMWare's offering merely rates 'nothing' special', I dont think you've ever really done any hands on comparison if thats how your ratings turned out.


I love your usual competitive nature, but keep it clean Patrick, there's no need for such bitterness, unless your quarterly figures aren't looking too bright?

Cancel
Just saw the apology.....accepted :-)
Cancel

It is not to say I will never adopt VDI Patrick.  I'm holding out for MED-V (Kidaro) though. : )  If you don't know what that is you can watch the video here http://kenzig.blogspot.com/2008/06/demo-of-microsoft-enterprise-desktop.html

I think Microsoft will wise up with licensing when the release it. 

Jim

Cancel
I have to agree with you some Patrick.  I am contractor for federal government, and we're looking at moving to a VDI solution in the next couple years one big reason; security.  We already have software assurance, and are currently fighting a daily battle that sounds to be very similar in size (except we have more sites).  WHen I look at the VDI I really see it as a ways inwhich we can get rid of some of the biggest burdens we have today.  The VDI may look like it costs more based upon your situation, but in my case the cost is probably about the same, but in the end the administration and management is much easier.
Cancel
If isn't just the SA though. It is scalability. You'll have to add 25 times the servers to do it if you do it organization wide.  If you are spending my tax dollars you better damn well be looking at Provisioning first. : )
Jim
Cancel
I disagree.  Novell lost because the stopped developing and relied to heavly on Microsoft for the desktop OS.   Sure a CEO can buy anything he reads in magazine, but for long term viablity of a product is takes engineers to understand, support, and implement it. 
Cancel

25 times more servers for what versus what?  VDI typically uses the same server hardware as TS/Citrix, i.e. two CPU sockets in 1U or blades.  The difference is that you pack them with 32-64GB or RAM, instead of 4GB.  With this configuration you can sometimes get 50-75 users on a server, assuming it's architected correctly.


I often hear the comparison that I can get 50-75 users on a dual CPU server with 4GB, and only a handful on the same hardware with VDI, and that is only a half truth, as by adding more RAM the hardware can scale very well, whereas adding more RAM on TS has little effect over 4GB.


I have customers working on deployments of 10s of thousands of virtual desktops, so it'll be interesting to see how these deployments pan out in the next couple of years.

Cancel

at the risk of sounding classless, :-) (im always conflicted with the moral debate on blogs/message boards...), in our shop we are running 60-80 VDM/VDI instances on a ESX 3.5 IBM 3950m2 Quad Quad Core 64GB ram 4 Quad Nics....


but what do i know since im always told.. Shane.. you are like school in the summer time.. NO CLASS!!! 


 

Cancel

Wrong, Novell did not win over the engineers... After a while, they became too cocky and arrogant.  They started putting out uber crap (Exchange is SO much better than Groupwise).  Bordermanager, just thinking about it make me throw up my lunch.  Novell became so arrogant and thought they owned the NOS market that they forgot to inovate and was subseqently passed up by MS and IBM.

Win over the Engineers, win over the market.  Sure the CxO have a say is what solutions are deployed but if you don't have the support of Engineers then you have no one to implement, support and make the project successfull.

 

Cancel

When you state a 'gigantic minority', as most companies have one or tow TS/Citrix admins,,, you definitely must be referring to large organizations. For SMBs, VDIs are not on the horizon, as with a VAST majority of SMBs state VDIs don't make business sense and the cost cannot be justified. Server virtualization yes, VDIs - only in very special circumstances. Seeing that over 80% of the NA business market is made up of SMBs, it's the little guys that will we need to worry about -; and just as importantly, the IT consultants and resellers that support these SMBs.

Cancel

Thanks for the data Shane.  It's nice to hear real numbers from the field.  So at 80 VMs on 16 cores, you're getting 5 VMs per core which is about right for conservative numbers.  Would you mind sharing your experiences, i.e. what caused you to go with quad vs dual socket systems, i.e. was that what you had, or did you need the extra 8 cores for your specific applications?


I'm particularly interested because we're always trying to figure out the true cost per user, and where the decision point is in using a big box with 4 sockets, or swcaling out to more smaller boxes.  I image some of it has to do with the per server cost of ESX, and some to do with the scalability of Virtual Center in the number of hosts it can manage.


The deployments I am working on are using blade systems with 2 x quad core CPUs and 64GB.

Cancel
Not true, if I use something like Ardence/Provisioning Server, then I can you the exact same server hardware, just add a SAN for the storage.  Besdies where I am it seems like we waste money on other decisions that just aren't as smart.
Cancel

What with this anonymous bashing? its becoming annoying to read through garbage to find meaningful comments. If stuff if posted on this site that you dont find interesting go around it, i am pretty sure that in the wide reader-base you will find people who are very interested in more business focused topics as well.


And secondly, why not ask the writers for more technical stuff instead of bashing the work they put out for you.. for free?


/René Vester

Cancel

Whoa now we are talking about blades with Virtual servers pushing out the VDI.  I'm really perplexed how this is saving you anything. Blades are super expensive, Esx is super expensive, you've got to buy the extra MS server OS's and if you buy SA for the servers (I was recently quoted $60,000 just for SA for 10 blades!) YIKES. Then you need the HP/Dell/IBM management stuff for the blades. Then the san. Holy cow you are  at least a half a million dollars before you even get to the VDI software and licensing.  I can buy 10 Servers with a san just as beefy for $100,000 and  still put VM's on them to get extras if I need them and use PVS for another $100K and I still pah a quarter of a million less than that. Plus I don't need to pay for the extra cooling  in my computer room the blades need.  


I'm just really confused what the benefit is.  Unless you have a single VHD like provisioning does, you STILL have to manage all of the VDI VM's , keep them all updated and spend the time on them. It isn't that much different when it comes to management of the actual workstations, if something goes wrong out there you still have to make a visit.  Unless you have high bandwidth the user has a crappy experience and will never be happy and and when you lose power everyone aross your entire organization is pretty much sol unless you have a redudant data center. With provisioning I can have a redundant machine out at the branch that contains the one image and it doesn't have to be very powerful, I lose power they stay up and able to boot machines. You could do the same with VDI but you need a big honking server at the branch to do it.


Patrick has to defend this stuff cause it is his livelihood and he is really into it.  But he is right it is not for everyone and I really wish the VDI vendors out there would tone it down a notch and sell the customers only what they need.  The reason why they are pushing VDI so much is there is a ton of money to be made in it. In this day and age people just can't afford this type of solution and are really doing their organizations a disservice in my opinion if they are not looking at the least expensive way to accomplish the same thing. I have a very hard time finding an ROI at least in my case when it comes to VDI.


I've yet to see a independent comparison where there is ROI over VDI vs SBC or just plain workstations.  Someone point one out to me please. Remember I said INDEPENDENT.


Let's go off on another topic:Here is an article for you Brian.  Ask people what their panacea administration software package/console would look like.  Mine would have Altiris Deployment, Dameware NT Utilities(i can do all shadowing and AD stuff here), Citrix, VMWare IC, RTO Discover,  and Rdesktops all rolled into one. Now THAT is something I would get out my checkbook for.   Why the heck can't everyone just use a standard on at least one thing?


Jim

Cancel

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122229911441473243.html?mod=yahoo_hs&ru=yahoo


Brian, even if it turns out not to be VMware that's acquiring Citrix, it's very clear you're on to something.


Kudos to Brian for his 20-20. 


 

Cancel

hmm... I found a PDF of this article here: http://www.filedropper.com/tiffanycitrixgainfocusasbuyoutrumorsreturn

I don't know how it go there

Cancel
VMtrix :D
Cancel
Yup, we'd end up with "vPresentation" or some other marketing garbage - another name for another version... oh wait, so nothing changes. nevermind ;)
Cancel
Work on that Brian and we may be back to a more fact based discussion. To all of those guest bashers, many of us are simply not allowed to post, so welcome input from us, many of us who run this stuff for all these vendors on a large scale and have valuable insight from the field as well. Death of guest is death of this site in my opinion. Also why did Jeff Pitch leave Quest if it's so good?
Cancel

Maybe you should ask Jeff. Probably for the same reason he's not working with Brian anymore.

Cancel

Our techies love and push the thin World, but theres are still so many companies (even Enterprise level), that prefer simple, basic infrastructure over this ever complicating Virtual World.


You could argue they are in the dark ages, miss the big picture, but a lot of CTO and CEO's we speak to prefer less complexity, lower costs (i agree higher support) - they don't all want to champion the latest technology - guess it depends on industry and user sprawl as well.


BTW I am pro Citrix/VMWare/Thin Computing, so saying what we hear back from customers!


A lot of customers were burnt in the past when trying Citrix for example when they tried to do a 'one size fits all' strategy - companies seem to be grasping now, the mix and belnd of different users communities they have within their compnayies!


Personally, the pace technology in general has evolved in the last few years is astounding (and bloody hard to keep on top of!).


Personally I can't see EMC (who own VMWARE) buying Citrix, although a funny smell is coming from theirn HQ!


 

Cancel

-ADS BY GOOGLE

SearchVirtualDesktop

SearchEnterpriseDesktop

SearchServerVirtualization

SearchVMware

Close