[THIN] Re: Desktop
- From: "Mads Sørensen" <thinmails@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2008 21:09:46 +0200
Yes.. but that you also would if you are using some other VDI application..
By using Virtuozzo you can start more Desktops on one server, because of the
little overhead - when we are talking Virtuozzo vs. XenServer or VMWare.
And if you are talking about XenApp vs. Virtuozzo, the user in Virtuozzo
will have there own desktop(server) they could play with, have local admin
rights etc. and if they f.. there desktop up, they will simply get a new
fresh one in no time.
We have a big school as a customer and they complain about the students not
having permissions to access the computers with admin rights when they are
teaching IT classes. So by giving them there own VDI desktop they can do
what ever they want. This you can't do with XenApp.. but again I don't
see XenApp and Virtuozzo as competitors
In my opinion Virtuozzo is on the sideline , they are not direct competitors
to any of Citrix's or VMware products. But it really has some potential in
the right environment.
/Mads
2008/4/1, Joe Shonk <joe.shonk@xxxxxxxxx>:
>
> If you do Application Virtualization (XenApp or Softgrid) with Virtuozzo
> you will essentially loose one of the big benefits you gain by using the
> Virtuozzo product. No longer will the application have a single footprint
> in memory, it will be duplicated for each session.
>
>
>
> And if you publish the applications what did you gain by using Virtuozzo
> that you could not have already done with published desktop from XenApp?
>
>
>
> Joe
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> *From:* thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] *On
> Behalf Of *Mads Sørensen
> *Sent:* Tuesday, April 01, 2008 10:45 AM
> *To:* thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> *Subject:* [THIN] Re: Desktop
>
>
>
> I hear what you are saying.. but I don't have any experience with
> Provision Network products, so I don't know what they could add to the
> environment, do you have a link (Presentation) or a demo video with
> Provision Network VAS used in a Virtuozzo environment?
>
>
>
> Regarding Applications there are many options:
>
>
>
> Streaming:
>
> - Citrix XenApp
>
> - Microsoft Application Virtualization(Softtricity SoftGrid)
>
>
>
> Publish Application:
>
> - Citrix XenApp
>
> - Windows Server 2008 TS (or maybe not.. :-)
>
>
>
> You could also create the application as templates on the Virtuozzo server
> and then add them to the containers. Applications can be added "on-the-fly"
> by the users self via the web interface and here they could also start a new
> desktop, depending on there access rights.
>
>
>
> Yes we are missing the USB redirection... guessing that's were Citrix or
> Provisioning Networks walks into the picture.. :)
>
>
>
> Steve, I'm not sure I understand you setup with both Virtuozzo and VM's
> ?? will you install VMWare inside the containers? or just PS inside the
> containers?
>
>
>
> Now I haven't tested XenDesktop yet, but will it be able to integrate that
> technology into the Virtuozzo containers and then use the ICA protocol to
> connect to the "VDI" instead of using RDP?
>
> /Mads
>
> 2008/4/1, Steve Greenberg <steveg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
>
> This is an interesting distinction. I think you probably should classify
> VDI on Virtuozzo as SBC, yet it isn't truly shared in the same way as TS. It
> is really an in-between hybrid. It is not truly SBC because if you customize
> the registry or file system in a virtual machine, it does copy on write,
> they are in fact represented as a distinct registry and file system to the
> machine. It is not truly VDI because important elements of the host OS are
> shared.
>
>
>
> For those who don't know this, Joe and I work together so we have
> discussed this many times. I really want the chance to do a production
> system which you described which uses Virtuozzo with VM's running PS but
> treat the VM's as single user machines. This would give you the best of all
> worlds- efficiency, a dedicated machine per user and the features of PS
> applied to the "VDI" session. Of course you could substitute Provision
> Networks potentitally feature wise. I don't know their license model, but I
> do know that since PS has no per-server cost that you can do this and only
> pay for concurrency of users.
>
>
>
> The potential downfall of this would be the MS licensing. You really would
> need to use Data Center edition of WIN2K3 (not sure about 2008) to allow the
> density of virtual machines that this could potentially host. So, once
> again, it all hinges on the economics of the MS portion…..
>
>
>
>
>
> *Steve Greenberg*
>
> Thin Client Computing
>
> 34522 N. Scottsdale Rd D8453
>
> Scottsdale, AZ 85266
>
> *(602) 432-8649*
>
> www.thinclient.net
>
> *steveg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx*
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> *From:* thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] *On
> Behalf Of *Joe Shonk
> *Sent:* Tuesday, April 01, 2008 8:57 AM
> *To:* thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> *Subject:* [THIN] Re: Desktop
>
>
>
> I still say it would be better if there was a XP version of Virtuozzo
> instead of a skinned version of Windows 2003. What advantage would
> Virtuozzo for VDI have over a conventional SBC Desktop? I would say from a
> Presentation Server vs XenDesktop standpoint, PS with Virtuozzo would be a
> better solution that Virtuozzo and XenDesktop. Why? Because you can
> publish applications (set up each VE as a 1 user terminal server for
> application isolation).
>
>
>
> I'm not disputing that Virtuozzo isn't efficient and scalable but you have
> to consider why it is you're choosing a VDI solution over a SBC solution.
> What is it you're getting out of a VDI solution that you can't get out of
> SBC? Virtuozzo is a moot point because everything it offers for a VDI
> solution, it also offers for SBC.
>
>
>
> Joe
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> *From:* thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] *On
> Behalf Of *Rick Mack
> *Sent:* Monday, March 31, 2008 10:19 PM
> *To:* thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> *Subject:* [THIN] Re: Desktop
>
>
>
> Hi Mads,
>
>
>
> NO argument, Virtuozzo is brilliant from a scalability and efficiency
> viewpoint, particularly when compared to using hypervisors.
>
>
>
> Because you're doing operating system partitioning instead of hosting
> separate instances of an operating system, it's nearly as scalable as
> terminal services.
>
>
>
> I was a fan of Virtuozzo years before SWsoft became Parallels.
>
>
>
> Nevertheless, it's more a virtualization platform than a VDI product
> because it's missing a lot of the little bits that round out a complete
> solution VDI solution. Stuff like published applications, UPD USB
> redirection, multi-media support etc.
>
>
>
> If you add Provision Network's VAS, which links into Virtuozzo, then you
> have a real VDI solution ;-)
>
>
>
> regards,
>
>
>
> Rick
>
>
>
> --
> Ulrich Mack
> Quest Software
> Provision Networks Division
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 3/31/08, *Mads Sørensen* <gasmadske@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Now we are talking VDI products, I think one of the best VDI products out
> there right now is "*Parallels Virtuozzo 4.0*", The beauty is that it uses
> the container technology on a Windows Server 2003 and with almost no
> overhead. So with a Windows Server 2003 Datacenter license and the XP Theme
> service, you can start as many desktops as you want or twice as many as you
> could with some other VDI software on one server :-). It has a really good
> management interface and I could go on. But as Rick also writes it may not
> be the place to discuss this.. so I'll stop her.. but it's really worth
> taking a look at.
>
>
>
> /Mads
>
>
>
>
>
Other related posts:
