they can always buy them. EMC has never been shy about acquisitions. Maybe that's why they are putting up the disinterested ugly front. Maybe they're working on a deal and they don't want MS, HP, IBM, Citrix etc to catch wind of it. On Sat, Jun 7, 2008 at 1:17 PM, Douglas Brown <dbrown@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Of course... But net2display is vdi or helps vdi, right??? > > I think vmware is doing something with rdp and they don't want anyone to > know. They have to be... RDP sucks as a remoting protocol for VDI. I'm > sorry but it does. There is not many people that love Vmware's VDM more > than me but it breaks when I use it as I have to use RDP (use it over > anything but a LAN and even then it sucks for anything intensive) > > Vmware is not dumb, they need a fix... The need to do something and > net2display could be an answer but Vmware can't wait 2 years for it... > > Ideas? > > > > > On 6/7/08 2:08 PM, "Greg Reese" <gareese@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > I don't care what VMWare marketing spin says, EMC is against anything that > isn't ESX or VDI. > > On Sat, Jun 7, 2008 at 11:32 AM, Douglas Brown <dbrown@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Steve, > > Great question. I want to learn more myself. Everything I read about it > is good. The big problem I've been told about it is that the big boy > (Microsoft, Vmware, Citrix) don't want anything to do with it and that > because of this it will not get the buyoff it needs to more of a standarized > remoting protocol. I would be interested to know what you guys this of > this too? Again, this is what I'm told and I can think of a few reasons > Microsoft and Citrix would not like it but I don't know why Vmware would be > against it. > > Thanks. This is a great topic.... A beefy remoting protocol is really > needed... > > > > > On 6/7/08 12:26 PM, "Steve Greenberg" <steveg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx < > http://steveg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > wrote: > > Rick, > > I haven't found any more detail information about Net2Display, do you have > any links that might show an implementation or at least the planned feature > set and performance characteristics? > > > > > *Steve Greenberg > * > Thin Client Computing > > 34522 N. Scottsdale Rd D8453 > > Scottsdale, AZ 85266 > > *(602) 432-8649 > * > www.thinclient.net <http://www.thinclient.net> <www.thinclient.net < > http://www.thinclient.net> > > > *steveg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx <http://steveg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > * > > ------------------------------ > > *From:* thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <http://thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> [ > mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>] *On Behalf > Of *Rick Mack > *Sent:* Saturday, June 07, 2008 8:21 AM > *To:* thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <http://thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > *Subject:* [THIN] Re: Pano VDI Solution > > > Hi Jim, > > > > Panologic and also Teradici have a hardware remoting protocol that has > completely transparent hardware (graphics, keyboard/mouse, USB etc) > "redirection". This means that multimedia performance and just about > everything else will be as good as on a PC, at least for LAN-based thin > clients. The good news for hardware manufacturers is that the "back-end" > systems are blade PCs. > > > > The largest single drawback with a Panalogic/Teradici type solution is the > hardware support required at both ends, and the fact that the protocol is > proprietary. > > > > Remote/WAN access is still going to be a problem with stuff like latency > etc but that may very well be handled by the new VESA Net2Display protocol > which will handle LAN clients as well. If Net2Display takes off, the > relevance of RDP and ICA could become questionable. Since Teradici are > heavily involved with Net2Display, it's probably a good guess that they will > soon have Net2Display support in their hardware. That makes it > non-proprietary and may well point to the future of thin clients. > > > > regards, > > > > Rick > > > > >