Brian Madden TV #17 - VMworld 2009 wrap-up: software PC-over-IP, client hypervisor, and RTO OEM

Gabe and Brian are at VMworld 2009 in San Francisco this week. (Read Brian's live blogs of the two keynotes - Day 1 and Day 2.) It's been a busy few days with a lot of demos. We recorded enough video content for probably two or three weeks worth of shows.

Today's episode includes the following highlights:

  • An interview with RTO Software CEO Kevin Goodman. (VMware just announced that they're OEMing RTO's "Virtual Profile" product for inclusion in a future version of View.)
  • A demo of VMware's client hypervisor called "CVP" from VMware's Robert Baesman.
  • A demo of VMware's upcoming software version of Teradici's PC-over-IP remote display protocol from Wyse's Aditya Prasad.
  • And of course, Brian and Gabe's thoughts and conversation about the show in general.

Oh, and in case you're wondering, yes, that's a custom NetApp shirt that I'm wearing. NetApp was the only vendor who met my challenge to use no PowerPoint in their BriForum 2009 breakout session. Thanks Mike Slisinger for making the great presentation!

View All Videos

Join the conversation

10 comments

Send me notifications when other members comment.

Please create a username to comment.

Very informative stuff, I'm currently running ESX server based desktops with Quest vWorkspace to Wyse S class clients, but am exploring the idea of changing to MS Hyper-V VMs with RemoteApp to the same Wyse S class clients.  Anyone got any insight?


Cancel

I am amazed people are actually considering a Microsoft hypervisor product. Are you out of your mind?


Cancel

Wyse should be ashamed of themselves.  That video bit compared the following things:


1) RDP5 without MMR (i.e. all video was host side rendered and it obviously looked crappy and caused high host CPU and network bandwidth)


2) PCoIP without MMR (i.e. all video was host side rendered and to be honest I don't think it looked any better than RDP did - watch closely before the camera zooms into the TaskMgr view.  As expected there's high host CPU because it's host rendered.  Now PCoIP did have reduced network bandwidth, but it was still fairly high)


3) PCoIP with MMR or Multimedia Redirection (i..e all video was not rendered on the host, but was instead streamed to the client where it was locally played back while looking like it was running on the host.  Because of this you see low host side CPU, very dramatically reduced network bandwidth as you only need the adequate bandwidth to stream the 2MBps video file plus a little overhead for the remainder of the PCoIP session.  Finally you see very fluid playback.  That's because it's running locally...duh!


Anyway, the reason why I'm saying this is REALLY disingenuous is that as many of you know, Wyse makes TCX which provides the same MMR (multimedia redirection) to the RDP protocol.  Why this video showed PCoIP in a fantastic light with respect to low CPU and low bandwidth and then didn't show the same exact thing for RDP is why I'm so ticked that things like this are shown at conferences/events.  If I worked for Wyse I'd be pissed because that guy basically just discounted all of the work they put into TCX for RDP.


Although maybe it's not the Wyse guys fault.  Maybe VMware is just such a gestapo that Wyse wasn't allowed to show TCX for RDP?  Let the rumor mill begin (unless the Wyse guy would like to defend his position publically here?)


Shawn


Cancel

The developer does state that MMR is disabled, so it was not as though he was misrepresenting anything.  TCX MMR also works with ICA, but I do not see the relevance of comparing TCX MMR in RDP, ICA and PCoIP.   I think the assumption is that it is all the same.  I believe the point was that TCX works with and enhances PCoIP.  Wyse MMR is a terrific feature, but far from comprehensive.  If you can get by with only supporting the multimedia codecs MMR works with than PCoIP does not add any value.  However, I believe there are numerous environments where administrators have been reluctant to replace physical desktops until a solution exists that more closely matches the full spectrum support of current, emerging and future multimedia content.  Everyone realizes that the downside to PCoIP is the additional host side resources it will consume.  MMR complements PCoIP by reducing this resource cost where applicable.  TCX MMR also  support multicast, which is a problem for any host side and most other redirection products (and yes, it works exactly the same in RDP and ICA).


Cancel

I'm saying it's being misrepresented because he only shows PCoIP with MMR.  Someone who doesn't know that TCX works with RDP/ICA might be inclined to think it's some magic they're working with PCoIP as a protocol.  I think it is a poor representation.  Either MMR should have been shown in both protocols or it should have not been shown at all.  Think of all of the people who go to VMworld who don't understand MMR and walk away with an impression that PCoIP is superior to RDP because this fantastic multimedia rendering that it does with very low CPU and bandwidth.  It's absolutely disingenuous.


Shawn


Cancel

@system.fracture I am actively looking to get ESX out of my environment because they represent lock in to a single Hypervisor. While ESX has been decent as I migrate to Won 7/ R2 etc Hyerp-V on Nehalem has been great. Now mgmt tools such as VMM + Citrix essential help, but more is needed. I find Dynamic Ops to be very interesting in this space. I fully expect the need for Hyervisor Diversity and will invest that way. I just know that MS will not support Callista on ESX and therefore it's a bad choice of Hypervisor for Desktops longterm.


The CVP Video was good to see. However shows the behind XenClient since they shown multi hypervisor already. But like Citrix this VPro is secure so buy the $$$ chip is rubbish it.slashdot.org/article.pl It's a myth. Neoclues does not need VPro so I hope people support them despite not getting MANAGE inside the guest as well. It's also a shame that there were no questions on management and the back. That's the real meat of this stuff. Forget Type 1 vs. 2 for a second and see Moka 5's backend management system. I also don't but this VMWare mindset of encapsulated bubble that will be moved from server to client. BS, which moron is going to move a 20GB HD around like that, you might as well install at the laptop or carry an external disk. You need layers with management like Moka 5. Yes there are others playing here too I just like Moka 5 since they provide rich policy. It's also clear to me that the HCL will suck so bad for so long that it's all going to be so limited, another reason as Brian also notes, moving sh.t around will not work.


@Shawn. He's right as usual and is keeping it real! BS demo. WYSE do some good stuff but this is crap.  WYSE hype thin client so much and never answer the question what happens when PERFECT remote protocols are not perfect. Guess what happens in the real world, you run stuff locally, and thin client represent custom hardware and limits you. Better to buy a cheap PC lock them down with a thin build and achieve flexibility without much cost difference. I don't but the power argument either vs. loss in functionality.


Cancel

Im with App detective.


Stuff the thin clients.. they cost to much.


The Wyse demo didnt impress me at all. The resource use was still high, and the performance wasnt awesome.


Cancel

Awesome show. Thanks guys! It's almost like being there in person. ;)


RTO: Way to go! I'm wondering though why VMware hasn't announced more details. Profile virtualization/User Environment Management is a key component in a lot of environments. Having RTO as part of View is a big benefit. But not if I can't buy it (from VMware)!


CVP: I'm glad to finally see a new VMware SVGA adapter with WDDM!!!!


I didn't really care about the rest of the demo. It all comes down to the HCL and drivers.


How will VMware be able to leverage the existing ESX drivers for CVP? Drivers for wireless cards will be a high priority issue. (The CVP demo briefly showed a virtualized wifi card?!) Without Wifi support CVP has very limited use.


Wyse: The PCoIP & MMR demo lacked a *wow* factor. I don't know what this demo was supposed to communicate? I think I'm now even more confused about the role of Teradici and PCoIP. What I'm taking away from this demo is, that employees can watch HD videos on the Thin Client with moderate bandwidth utilization. But how does that tie back in to the role of IT helping the business to create value? A few more tangible examples of more typical business applications might have helped here.


I'm getting less impressed with Wyse as a company. How exactly did they become market leader? ;)


Christoph


Cancel

Guys, those Lenovo W series laptops are gross!


They are clunky, and the pen tablet is horrible.  Just my 2 cents =)


Cancel

PCoIP is certainly a great display protocol.  However in some scenarios of slow remote connections (like over certain WANs) there may be issues where PCoIP doesn't function quite as well.  In those cases, you can complement the VMware View deployment with Ericom Blaze, a software-based RDP acceleration and compression product that provides improved performance over WANs. Besides delivering higher frame rates and reducing screen freezes and choppiness, Blaze accelerates RDP performance by up to 10-25 times, while significantly reducing network bandwidth consumption over low-bandwidth/high latency connections.


Ericom Blaze can be used in conjunction with VMware View 4 for enhancing performance of PCoIP in a WAN environment.


Read more about Blaze and download a free evaluation at:


www.ericom.com/ericom_blaze.asp


Adam


Cancel

-ADS BY GOOGLE

SearchVirtualDesktop

SearchEnterpriseDesktop

SearchServerVirtualization

SearchVMware

Close