I respectfully contend that the “Madden Paradox” is fundamentally flawed because it is equating “VDI” with VMware and Citrix and not taking into account more complete offerings in the market such as VERDE from Virtual Bridges and IBM.

IBM gave a very compelling demonstration and presentation of the newly-announced VERDE 2.0 yesterday at CloudWorld in San Francisco.

If the world were flat then yes, the “paradox” is increasingly true. The gap between TS and VDI is increasingly negligible. But, the world is not flat, and there are vendors out there who offer truly innovative VDI, not just blatant extensions of the server consolidation paradigm with token efforts at incorporating innovations that address desktop-centric computing. Of the two, Citrix at least seems to understand the desktop better but they are the ones most caught in the teeth of the “Madden Paradox” – but that is another discussion.

So, if you come to see the world as round, you will see that Virtual Bridges’ VERDE has been designed from the ground up as a pure VDI product and addresses most of the issues that you have been insightfully pointing out are wrong with the flat-world comparison for TS and VDI.

When looking at The Paradox in the context of TS versus VDI, where VDI is defined as VERDE, then there are a number of distinguishing advantages of VDI over TS – and, I concede that TS still fills certain use cases better than VDI, but in meeting the needs of next generation desktop management, which is what VDI is all about, VDI has a number of distinct advantages:

1) VDI is superior for Public Clouds and MSP’s because of the better inherent segregation of users on the same servers. This is more cost efficient (HW, SW and operating cost), more energy efficient and more flexible for serving diverse populations efficiently.

2) VDI is superior in its ability to accommodate heterogeneous user environments – VDI allows one to seamlessly deploy a mix of XP, Windows 7 and Linux on the same infrastructure. This is important to not only future-proof your management and provisioning infrastructure, but also to make it more flexible in assigning the right desktop to the right job instead of a one-size-fits-all tariff on your desktop population.

3) VDI is superior in Application compatibility… (as referenced above). Not only are there applications that are not TS-aware or TS-friendly, but when dealing with sensitive legacy applications with finicky food chain dependencies, it is a lot easier/cheaper to isolate and provision these from a separate gold image than it is from a separate server as is required in TS.

4) VDI is superior in enabling disconnected use/local processing. Just because VMware and Citrix have no figured this out yet doesn’t mean others haven’t. VERDE has had support for disconnected use for several months. TS will never cross this barrier. VDI (VERDE) can do it today.

5) VDI is more flexible in accommodating distributed infrastructure whereas TS requires a centralized monolithic array of servers. This is currently unique to VB, and counter-intuitive to VDI, but the ability to have regional data centers and replicated branches that are centrally managed and dynamically provisioned as opposed as having to consolidate infrastructure into data centers gives VDI a practical advantage in situations where network reliability or bandwidth is an issue.

6) VDI servers are lower maintenance – VDI architectures are effective stateless when it comes to applications on servers whereas TS architecture needs to have applications installed on each server, and each server therefore requires more management and care. VDI involves running of desktop gold master images that are stored on disk. The applications are installed in the gold master images, not on the server.

7) VERDE VDI has built-in storage optimization. With its minimal persistent storage requirements this compares a lot closer to TS than Vmware for example. This isn’t really an advantage of VDI over TS, but it narrows the TS advantage

In the same vein, unlike the re-purposed server-oriented hypervisors like Xen and ESX, VERDE uses a more modern hypervisor approach so that densities of our desktop-oriented hypervisor are closer to TS densities than to the densities of antiquated server-oriented hypervisor densities.

So, in our view, VDI has several compelling and sustainable advantages over Terminal Services that will allow it to fulfill the high expectations that analysts and strategists have for it… but it will be a slow painful process if thought leaders continue to look to Vmware and Citrix for delivering on the promise.

Unfortunately, if you concede that there is a bigger world out there beyond just Vmware and Citrix, you will have to give up on your dream of the “The Madden Paradox” being your ticket to the Industry Lexicon Hall of Fame…

Link to Brian Madden’s “Madden Paradox”

Related articles by Zemanta

• NetApp goes native with Fibre Channel over Ethernet (computerworld.com)

{ 0 comments }