TechAgility

So as things slowdown in the lead up to the break I have had some time to get back and review some twitter posts and other blog articles that I have been meaning to catch up on. I must admit that I tend not to use Twitter that much but do find it quite useful as pointers to additional material for research and recently posted material on the topics that I’m interested in.

So one article that really caught my eye was this from Ruben Spruijt’s post at Brian Madden, because for a number of years now it is the Hard Drive that has not kept pace with advancements in technology for the rest of the PC/Laptop components, and in particular I have noted a number of people getting very enthusiastic about the performance improvements they have actually noticed when using Laptops with SSD’s

Runcore SSD’s – promises to boost computer performance vs. the traditional 1.8" HDD by more than 400% with read/write speeds up to 75/40MB/sec.
Experience with 128GB 1.8" ZIF in HP 2710p – Read/write performance for 4K random files has improved over 500% (even under Bitlocker). it just became the fastest computer I ever used… Word and Excel launch in one or two seconds (compared to 30-60 before)…

Just how fast does the storage component of VDI have to be?
So it stands to reason that if you are going to Virtualize your Desktops (and by definition centralize?) then you are going to need to give some serious throughput for the Disk I/O or IOPS? So for anyone who is embarking on this then I would seriously recommend giving this article a through read? Understanding how storage design has a big impact on your VDI!

Possibly the most interesting point that Ruben did bring to my attention with this is that in VDI implementation the Disk I/O is predominately Writes and not Reads – I know this sounds contradictory in some respects, but do review this for yourself – in particular is a good comment from Claudio Rodrigues regarding the nature of how the O/S’s deal with this, as well as confirmation from Dan Feller at Citrix who confirms that most of the numbers and math are in sync with his findings. Ruben has also supplied a Sizing Tool to get a good idea of what might be needed?

So it also starts to make sense that you make sure that you focus very sharply on the XP or Windows 7 Template VM’s in the first place to reduce the I/O required as much as possible?
Citrix has some great tips in this document - Best Practices – Citrix XenDesktop with Citrix Provisioning Server

So as this brought up some interesting thoughts I also found this article relating to sizing and best practices, VMware View sizing & best practices
which followed on from this original article Virtual Infrastructure best practices and in essence this confirms that the storage requirements will need to focused somewhere around an 20/80 split on the Read/Write (20% read and 80% write)

While this table gives a quick representation of what sort of sizing requirements are out there please make sure you research this subject thoroughly, and read the post in full? J

In all fairness I must also confess at this point that my weakest area in IT is storage, and as yet I have not had a functioning Lab running either Citrix’s XenDesktop or Vmware’s View to be able to play around with this and get my hands dirty with either Provisioning Server or Composer. From what I can see (based on Marketing so far J) both of these products have the ability to drastically minimize the storage needed for VDI and as a consequence I am assuming that this may indeed have a flow on effect to mitigating the IOPS issue? (Can anyone comment or set me straight on this?)

I then went on to find some more details around the costing and financial side of VDI implementations and found this article of Doug Brown’s regarding Cost Savings of VDI: Is It Possible? as the diagram below points out, it is complex, and as such it could be that the regular ROT/TCO calculations are not highlighting all the potential benefits and savings?

Changing the ROI/TCO Calculation?
So this then brings me to another update in my Twitter was from Tyler at LiquidwareLabs.com with a new addition to the ROI/TCO debate,
COP – Coefficient of Productivity in VDI the New Math , in which he points out that you should also factor in any additional productivity gains and use this to dilute the true cost of the CAPEX.

Now I wonder how many VDI proposals are brave enough to start assigning values to what has traditionally been seen as "additional" benefits related to an architectural change? Don’t get me wrong, I’m not against it, but I can see the debate might start to get a bit heated in the boardroom? and in some respects maybe that’s exactly what’s needed – by assigning values and assumptions and then extrapolating them across an enterprise the resultant *potential* savings become too hard for the board to ignore?

Sure there will be debate, and rightly so, but in following this sort of process it should quickly become apparent that there is a technological shift under way where the concept of "My Desktop" still being something that can be pointed to in the Office sitting on a desk somewhere is rapidly becoming redundant?

Now having said all that – it’s interesting to note that Gartner’s Hype Cycle Report for 2009 seems not to have VDI listed? Maybe it’s hiding under something else here?

So will VDI make it to "mainstream"? AMD seems to think so, Taking Desktop Virtualization Mainstream, but also a lot of it will depend on a number of factors.

My main thoughts on this are:

To truly succeed VDI needs to be able to deliver a *High Fidelity* User experience equal to or better than what users have today – if what you are designing is unable to provide this then you should stop and re-evaluate now

If you can build a system that is able to provide this then users will want (no, Demand!) that they have it ASAP – you will know that you have succeeded when demand outstrips supply

To provide this *High Fidelity* User experience I’d suggest focusing on two key areas that may/or may not apply depending on your particular focus and what is considered in or out of scope for your project?

• Graphics
  
  • Bottom line – Graphics performance in this design CANNOT be measured, it has no metrics, or Best Practices. One persons "that’s fine" is another persons "there is absolutely no way I’ll put up with that", etc. This will always be a completely subjective assessment based on whoever is rendering the judgement.
  • You may think that you don’t need to focus too much on Graphics because "there isn’t much need or requirement for Video from the business" but I can almost bet that you would be wrong – if you are operating on this assumption be sure that you double-check with Stakeholders and get their agreement in writing?
  • So much content on the Internet is done in Flash today, it’s not just watching a CEO or Analyst briefing via YouTube, a lot of Web Based Training modules use the same or similar technologies, so even if you currently block YouTube and Facebook today it’s still quite likely that you need to factor this in to your design
  • Is RDP good enough? Check this assumption by giving targeted business users a Thin Client and removing their desktop to the lab and forcing them to access via the Thin Client – this is a simple but effective test that validates whether they truly need/demand High Fidelity, or will OK Fidelity do?
  • Do you need Citrix HDX? PCoIP? RGS? While I’m making the point about Remote Protocols – don’t forget to gather details of connecting accessories? Do you need to support serial or parallel?
• HDD or IOPS
  
  • Make sure the VM performs as well as possible while measuring the I/O on the VM itself? Check the disk queue, and ensure that it’s not the disk performance that’s holding this back – and make sure you have enough throughput to allow for Login’s etc.

So where does that leave us?
In the Graphics space there is already a number of solutions for VDI that have been out for some time (Citrix’s HDX) or have recently been released (Teradici’s software version of PCoIP). In addition to that there are other approaches if you need to support High Fidelity Users at the top end with HDX-3D taking advantage of Nvidias GPU’s that almost bring TeraFLOP performance to the Desktop.

A good introduction to CUDA – Just how powerful can GPU’s be? Back in mid-2008 the GT200 was able to deliver 1 TeraFLOP performance, the G80 supports 768 Threads per Core – on 128 Cores… Want a Personal Supercomputer? What would you use it for?

So I suspect that we are not far away from seeing vGPU’s being available to VM’s that will be able to deliver the performance on demand – the main thing is that you make sure you are either using a Remote Protocol stack that can provide this functionality – OR make sure you are using a Broker that supports a shift to one?

At the HDD level I’d suspect that as SSD prices come down and SSD longevity increases, along with improved methods of utilising this in some kind of shared caching mechanism in a VDI deployment we may well see some serious advances that enable VDI to overcome this IOPS roadblock?

With the monotonous regularity of Moore’s Law driving CPU performance up it should be possible to provide way more CPU power to users than they really need to enable this – but again – it’s quite possible that the Disk I/O that has the potential to spoil this party?

Please feel free to correct any of my ramblings?

written by dcaddick

The T5545 Thin Client from HP is quite a neat mid-range device that has some nice features that can make your life quite easy, but so far it seems that it’s not all that easy to find out how to go about tweaking it to your environment and users?

I’ll update this later with some additional links to docs – but feel free to email me if you need additional info?

So some handy hints:
(This all applies to the latest Build 31 )

Logging on as Administrator – default password is root

Add HP or Debian Packages to T5545

• Fsunlock – unlocks file system (equivalent to XPe/WES’s EWF or FBWF)
• cd /media – or cd /mnt
• hpkg -i xxxx.hpk   or
• dpkg -i xxxx.deb
• fslock – locks the file system back up
• reboot

Use ezUpdate to automatically update image/packages/custom scripts/Stateless Settings/Persistent Settings
(This is also valid for the new ThinPro K2 build on the T5145)  
Do be aware that you do not need to endlessly reboot to test it – just call ezUpdate from the X Term Console?
·         If you need to validate what it’s doing then check the logs in ./writable/ezUpdate/log/ezUpdate.log using the MousePad from the Advanced area of the Control Panel
·         If you still do not have enough info then run “ezUpdate –d 5” to enable debug mode on the log
·         The order of what it will look for is:

• New Image
• Any new packages
• Custom
• Then check for valid Stateless profile
• Finally check for valid Persistent profile
  

  ezUpdate Admin Guide

·         If you’d like to test/demo the ezUpdate process then you could always *add* the rar package as shown here:

• Download this sample package: http://packages.debian.org/lenny/i386/rar/download
• Put the package in the packages directory on the ezupdate server
• reboot or simply run ezupdate
• Check the log and you should find that it has installed the package correctly
• Run “dpkg –list” in the Terminal to show that rar is now an installed package

·         If you’d then like to remove the application, then this is how we can go about it:

• fsunlock
• dpkg -r rar    (this might need to be hpkg depending on where the package came from?)
• fslock
• reboot/run ezUpdate
• if it still looks like it might be there, then use the dpkg –purge command?

How to deploy ThinPro Settings via Altiris or HPDM
Link to doc here:

Configuring TeamTalk
Have you ever been frustrated or in the dark on how to configure TT when it comes to GUI Menus?  There are a ton of specific GUI configs commands in the Team Talk 7.0 manual chapter 21 command line.   The commands can be added to teemtalk_wrapper.sh.  These settings will apply to all connections from HP Connection Manager.
The file to modify is – /usr/bin/teemtalk_wrapper.sh

Modifying the Menu
If your user has a need to modify the Menu under ThinPro (say they don’t want the Control Center up and available for users) – use the following technique.  You can use it to display commands as well as long as you select the right command.
1)      Login as administrator
2)      Right click on the Menu
3)      Open the menu editor
4)      Click the (+) to add an entry
5)      Then the command to start a connection is
a.      Connection-mgr start $ID
b.      connection-mgr start type:label  (under the usr/bin directory)
ex. connection-mgr start ica:”My ICA”

Get back in after locking down?
Pressing CNTL+ALT+SHIFT+S will bring up  hptc-shutdown – the Shutdown dialog that will give the Switch to Admin Mode Option.

written by dcaddick

The best piece I have read from the IT Industry in the last two weeks or so is:

Why desktop virtualization projects fail

Desktop virtualization is one of the hottest topics of interest and a major initiative of many companies. Touted benefits include lower operating costs, simpler management and desktop mobility. Below we’ll explore what the barriers to wide-scale adoption of desktop virtualization solutions are and some approaches to deal with them. It’s not a fit for everyone in a company but it can be for many.

Challenge #1: Assuming desktop virtualization makes sense because thin clients are cheap - Many people assume that virtualizing desktops is going to be magnitudes cheaper because thin clients can be found for approximately $300-400 whereas a PC can cost $500-$1200.

Tip: Client costs are only part of the picture. Desktop virtualization can reduce capital expenditures but do not expect that to be the case in the first year. Building the infrastructure is expensive (storage, servers, licenses, etc.) and may be the same in the first year. Think about using existing PCs as clients instead of replacing them with thin clients. Thin clients are cheaper than PCs but the reduction in hardware costs may not be seen for a couple of years due to the infrastructure needing to be built. More importantly, operational expenses will be seen immediately and that is where the true cost savings can be found.

………   more at source

I have also collated below some of the details I have discovered around the latest news on PCoIP and HDX-3D

From Brian Madden:

Look out PC-over-IP! Citrix announces new host-side GPU-based encoding for HDX 3D

For me the most crucial part of this post is explaining this:

How HDX 3D works

On the remote host side, Citrix is releasing a custom VDA for the environments where you want to use HDX 3D. (The VDA, or “Virtual Desktop Agent,” is the software agent you install on your remote workstation OS that lets it participate in a XenDesktop farm and gives the ICA hosting capability to a desktop OS.) Having a separate VDA shouldn’t be a problem for anyone since this is a physical workstation host solution anyway, so it’s not like you’re sharing the same disk image with remote desktop VMs.

On the client side, HDX 3D is just another plug-in for the Citrix Receiver. (That’s newspeak for “it’s just another virtual channel for the regular ICA client.”)
HDX 3D lets you configure the image quality, so you can balance the bandwidth-to-user experience. (PC-over-IP lets you do this too.)

From a technical standpoint, the HDX 3D engine replaces the existing ICA progressive display capability. It lets the OpenGL or DirectX stuff render on the host, and then it scrapes them and makes what’s essentially like an M-JPEG movie which is streamed down and played on the client. In many ways this is similar to the way HP RGS and Teradici PC-over-IP.

……….    more at source

What this tells me is that this is right in the zone for HP’s Blade Workstation’s as they have Nvidia based GPU, and that the BladePC’s would not be in at all as they are AMD/ATI based hardware. It’s also interesting to note some more details coming out via this Citrix Community Blog HDX 3D – What Happened to Projects Pictor, Apollo and Prism? and the subsequent comments from Sridhar Mullapudi, Sr. Product Manager:

Though the first release is available for only XD customers, future releases will enable XA customers to get HDX 3D using VM Hosted Apps technology. And with GPU virtualization and related technologies in the future, we will enable support of HDX 3D on virtual machines as well.

And for VMware Brian Madden had this commentary…

After VMworld, VMware still has to prove they "get" desktops. 13 questions about their desktop strategy they need to answer.

The irony of this is that I really, really want VMware to be successful with desktops. Competition from VMware has caused Citrix to put more innovation into their desktop delivery products in 18 months than they have in the past ten years combined. If VMware rolls over on the desktop, I hope that the Symantec or Quest can step up to apply pressure to Citrix or else we’re going to have another decade of innovation ice age.

But back to the main topic: VMware’s lack of desktop vision.

At last year’s VMworld, we got all these great indications of what VMware was capable of in the desktop space. (Here’s my article from then where I could hardly contain my excitement about six desktop announcements.) And how did VMware follow up at this year’s VMworld?

• We got demos of the PC-over-IP and the client hypervisor. (This has a lot of promise and looks to be really great.)
• We learned that VMware will OEM RTO Software’s Virtual Profiles technologyfor some future release of View. (Not View 4 though, from what we can tell.)

So those were two great things. (Tactical, but still great.) Unfortunately that’s kind of where the good news from VMworld stopped:

• VMware demoed their client hypervisor known as CVP. (yay!) But we learned that it won’t be available until 2H 2010! Last year they said their client hypervisor was going to ship by the end of 2009, and now it’s another 8+ months away!?!
• The View futures session was just about View 4. VMware still hasn’t announced a release date, although the rumor is it’s still coming at some point this year. View 4 will have PC-over-IP, but little else new. (Oh, it will have vSphere 4 support.)

  …………    more at source

from Citrix Community blog:

• Desktop Virtualization is not Server Virtualization  (This title pretty much tells it like it is)
• Setting the Record Straight on XenDesktop (there’s not that much difference between XenDesktop and View apparently? )
• Interesting comment towards the bottom – Lastly, while I differ with most of what one VMware Community member, Rkelly, posted re View vs. XenDesktop, I have to say I agree with his final point for the IT team in any VMware shop:  "Download the trial versions of both products and see for yourself" . You just can’t beat a “Try before you buy”

From Alessandro and Virtualization.info

Virtual Computer partners with XenoCode

The company already has a Xen-based client hypervisor and a fairly complex web-based console which uses virtual machines,  snapshots and clones to publish the right system environment to the right user with the right customization. Now Virtual Computer also simplified the management of the application layer thanks to a technology partnership with XenoCode, the application virtualization company that already has an OEM deal with Novell.

Compared to the Novell agreement, Virtual Computer is not OEM’ing the XenoCode Virtual Application Studio. It is just supporting the applications virtualized with the XenoCode technology out-of-the-box inside its NxTop virtual machines.

It is not a revolution but this way Virtual Computer is silently building an end-to-end VDI stack that one day could rival with the upcoming ones from Citrix and VMware.

And lastly….  I haven’t see this before? The AppFactory, based in UK from the looks of it and promising to Virtualize your Apps from 149 pounds an App?
I wonder how well these guys will do? Very slick and professional web site, so it will be interesting to hear how well they do?

written by dcaddick

So it’s hardly a surprise that Citrix have decided to “Announce” the long awaited HDX-3D “high quality user experience” protocol enhancement in the early hours prior to the start of the VMworld conference? Pardon me for being something of a sceptic, but it seems that this might have more to do with the fact that Teradici are expected to release the Software only version of their PCoIP protocol stack in Public Beta at this event?

I’ve had a look around the MyCitrix.com site and from what I can see there is no new components as the latest update was the addition of the Feature Release 1 update of the XenDesktop Agent component back on the 5/1/09? I’d be more than happy to be proved incorrect, but I’d imagine that if Citrix had actually posted this new component up on the web site as an available download then they’d be making sure it was “in your face”?

I’m pretty well acquainted with RGS and it’s capabilities, so I’m quite keen to get my hands on both of these new technologies and give them a going over to find their strengths and weakness’s.  One of the biggest issues/problems is that the visual quality that is delivered is subject to “peoples perceptions” and as such can be quite difficult to comparisons? One persons “great”, can be another persons “rubbish”?

I’ll be at Microsoft’s TechEd 09 on the Gold Coast here in Australia next week (on the HP Stand) and I’m hoping to be able to do live demonstrations and comparisons of RDP6, RDP7 and RGS so that Customers can see for themselves why implementing the correct Remote Protocol stack can be crucial depending on their particular circumstances.

Citrix Enhances Market Leading HDX Technology for High-Definition Virtual Desktops

Mon Aug 31, 2009 3:01am EDT

Breakthrough New HDX 3D Technology Enables Citrix XenDesktop to Deliver High-End
Professional Graphics in Real-Time over Any Network
SANTA CLARA, Calif.--(Business Wire)--
Today Citrix Systems, Inc. (NASDAQ: CTXS), announced a new breakthrough addition
to its market leading HDX Technology, ensuring a high-definition virtual desktop
experience even for the most demanding high-end professional graphics
environments. The new HDX 3D technology, available as a feature of Citrix
XenDesktop, delivers a rich, high-definition desktop experience applications to
users in any location, over any network. Combined with the full portfolio of HDX
technologies in XenDesktop, the new HDX 3D capability allows organizations to
leverage talent globally, while still housing data centrally, assisting in
real-time collaboration among disperse design teams while still ensuring the
security of critical intellectual property. HDX 3D is part of an extensive range
of HDX technologies from Citrix that go well beyond a single protocol to address
potential problems in all parts of the IT infrastructure, from the datacenter,
to the network, to the device. Combined with the company`s groundbreaking HDX
Adaptive Orchestration technology, XenDesktop can also dynamically adapt to
changes in the environment by applying the best technologies for each unique
user scenario (see http://hdx.citrix.com for more detail).

Citrix Enhances Market Leading HDX Technology for High-Definition Virtual Desktops | Reuters

written by dcaddick

So some of you may be aware that the new T5545 was released some while back with a new O/S designated ThinPro – this has recently been updated with a new release of Build 31 and now looks a little like this in Admin mode:

To switch to Admin mode there is a simple menu action in the lower left:

and the default password is “root”

Updated T5145 with ThinPro:

Now that by itself may not seem too significant but there has also been some significant changes to the T5145 – the old Admin Interface (ID:Admin\Pwd:Admin) looked like this:

But the newly released version HP ThinPro for HP t5145 Thin Client (128 MB) available for download since Jul 31st looks like the T5545?

In fact there appears to be very little difference between the two – even down to the fact that under the Advanced Tab there is an XTerm Console available?

written by dcaddick

Just like London Buses, you wait around for ages, and then they all turn up at once? (Whitepapers, that is?)

HP reference configuration for Citrix XenApp: 1,500 Microsoft Office 2003 users on HP ProLiant BL460c G6 server blades

This document illustrates multiple blades configurations using bare-metal configurations and converting them to virtualized ones.  The goal is to illustrate the value of virtualization and detail cost and associated power improvements.

There are three configurations discussed:

• Configuration 1: x64, bare-metal – Four HP ProLiant BL460c G6 server blades
• Configuration 2: x64, virtualized – Five HP ProLiant BL460c G6 server blades
• Configuration 3: x86, virtualized – Four HP ProLiant BL460c G6 server blades

But I think that even with just these two images they tell the story quite succinctly?

Figure 1. Reference configuration 1 – Four bare-metal HP ProLiant BL460c G6 server blades (x64) – 1,608 users

Figure 2. Reference configuration 2 – Five virtualized HP ProLiant BL460c G6 server blades (x64) – 1,700 users

written by dcaddick

**UPDATE** I have received the following comment:

has anyone had any luck with the Automating Citrix Xenapp whitepaper, as i have issues when trying to import the deploy XenServer Altiris job as both .bin files seem to contain the same jobs, which are for deploying clients.

And yes this is the case – I have contacted the Author and the doc should be updated, but if you need the *.bin file please drop me a line?

Essentially there are two PDF’s, the first is the Overview and the second contains the detail with the scripts embedded in the PDF document.

One key take-away from the Overview is this graph of how many users *you might* get from an x64 installation :

I don’t have the facilities or time to be able to test any of this but it certainly looks quite comprehensive and appears to leverage the HP RDP (Altiris Server) component quite well to Automate things as much as possible.

Two new white papers have been released to ActiveAnswers at HP.  These papers reflect a joint development effort by HP & Citrix which, when combined, provide customer value-add specific to our partnership.

"Data Center transformation – Citrix Deliver Center enabled by HP Adaptive Infrastructure" provides an overview of the collaboration:

"Automating Citrix XenApp on XenServer deployments on HP ProLiant servers" illustrates how HP Insight Rapid Deployment Software (RDP) can be used with Citrix-developed PowerShell scripts to automatically provision and manage XenApp on XenServer on ProLiant servers.  The paper provides the instructions and scripts to deploy a XenApp farm on XenServer from bare-metal to application publishing.

Please note that the scripts provided were originally developed for each company’s internal use and are not officially supported through tech support or escalation channels.  That said, the solution has been verified by the HP and Citrix engineering team and are being released to provide the scripts to customers who may find them useful.

written by dcaddick

***UPDATE***

Please check the comments below – but it appears I’m incorrect on the statement regarding Teradici PCoIP needing a PCI card, there is a SW/SW version in development and I’d be guessing this might be coming out sometime around VMworld as Beta? Just a guess on my part?

So just as we headed in to the weekend I noted Brian Madden’s post – Microsoft’s RDP host-side rendering (Calista) plans include optional GPU offload hardware & custom chips. (Oh, and Hyper-V is required!) as well as Alessandro’s post Is Microsoft silently building a better VDI? and realised that this also tied in with some recent articles earlier in the week from the MSDN side of things around the new Remote Desktop Services (RDS now effectively replaces the old Terminal Services) on Windows 2008, namely getting Aero Glass Remoting in Windows Server 2008 R2 and Running WS08 Terminal Server as a virtualized guest under Windows Server 2008 R2 Hyper-V.

So now this started getting me thinking, there is an almost unbelievable amount of hype right now about VDI, where it’s getting to the point that as soon as we hear about either a Customer or a Partner telling us that they have installed a PoC/Pilot or deployed VDI we can almost guarantee the next thing they will be wanting to know is “how do I get decent Video/MultiMedia/USB performance, it’s not working correctly, and I want it fixed”.

Ideally what should happen when designing a Desktop Virtualization Strategy (in my opinion) is start with the Success Criteria that the design needs to meet as defined by the business units/stakeholders/users, and if they are unsure or don’t know, then the best way to think about this is to strive to provide a User Experience that is *indistinguishable* from a normal PC.

Which is why the first part of designing the solution should be deciding on the Remote Protocol that is needed to meet the Success Criteria?

• If you only need to supply standard Office Apps then RDP will likely be fine
• If it’s Office Apps plus some Video with some USB devices then you may find that you can get away with RDP plus one of the RDP enhancements like TCX, etc.
• If it’s Office Apps plus some Video with some USB devices and you need to make this work over something less than a 10Mb LAN with a possibility of anything greater than 150 – 200ms latency then you may want to seriously consider ICA as the only viable choice.
• Now if you have demanding users that require a true PC like experience regardless of how it’s done then there are a number of choices like RGS (from HP), PCoIP (from Teradici), SPICE (from Redhat?), etc. however as you start to examine the pro’s and con’s of each one you may find that each one of these may bring further limitations to yuor design?
  • The key takeaway from this is that you can have either a good 
    user experience *OR* low bandwidth – not neccessarily BOTH?

Desktop Virtualization today:

So my opinion is that currently there are two front runners out there today marketing, selling and deploying Virtual Desktop Solutions:

• Citrix XenDesktop
• VMware View

I know there are others of note, but generally these are the two main leaders today who are spending the most in Marketing trying to own the top spot in this area, and who both not only have a Solution and a Broker but also a Hypervisor that provides the grunt at the back end. However to a certain extent both of these solutions are fundamentally flawed in that neither of them *currently* have (or support) a Remote Protocol that delivers what I would refer to as a High Quality User Experience that is available today.

Side note on “High Quality User Experience”:

So far most of what I have seen in the field is examples of “Desktop Virtualization” that have been designed by IT for IT – not for the business or users. In some instances it has come as quite a shock to those designing the Solution that one or all of the various Stakeholders, Business or Users not only want the ability to view Training Video’s, but actually have the audacity to demand it as a Criteria of Success for the project? And USB redirection for their Blackberries too!

Bottom line, if your planned Desktop Virtualization solution does not include MultiMedia and USB as a measure of success then there is a good chance it’s fundamentally doomed? At the very least include some scope for a Phase 2 that will expand the project to include this and plan for it up front?

Yes VMware has announced a partnership with Teradici to develop PCoIP for VDI instances of View, (VMware does support HP’s RGS in View, but only to BladePC’s and BladeWS’s) but this appears that it will be based on a H/W PCIe card that will be capable of supporting 32 and 64 VDI instances from the hosted end, so there are some limitations like having to use Servers that can support PCIe cards, but the real kicker is that these cards won’t be available until mid-next year?

Yes Citrix has HDX, (re-Marketed term covering the ICA Protocol ) and although they have now started releasing the HDX-Flash add-on there is still no sight of the HDX-3D? For the life of me I can’t understand what is holding up Citrix on this, if it is really as good as it’s supposed to be then they should be releasing it now while they can beat VMware to the punch.

How to create a portable ver. of RDP7:

So with this in mind I looked a bit deeper at the RDP7 side of things to see what differences there were? First thing I noticed was that it’s still referred to as Ver. 6.1.7100.0 (this is Ver. 7, right?), and after some quick googling the next thing I came across is that it is relatively simple to take a copy of the MSTSC.EXE and save it to a folder on another machine and run this version (you will also need a copy of MSTSCAX.DLL and a folder beneath this named “en-US” and in this you’ll need a copy of MSTSC.EXE.MUI and MSTSCAX.DLL.MUI)

Once you have this accomplished you’ll be free to run the RDP7 Client to connect to either your Windows 7 or Server 2008 Host and see what differences there are. Essentially all of the differences are covered under the post:Aero Glass Remoting in Windows Server 2008 R2 but I must admit I was quite surprised at how well it was able to cope with a DiVX avi of Kung Fu Panda, the picture was really sharp and defined, the audio appeared to stay in synch and it didn’t appear to consume much more than 4 – 500Kb/s. When it came to Flash this again had good definition and sharpness – but there was lot’s of gaps in the playback – so on Flash it still scores a miss?

Putting this in context, here are some very rudimentary tests:

**NOTE** I did not test the Aero feature

Bandwidth was simply measured by using “Bandwidth Monitor” from www.bwmonitor.com
This also had the effect of causing 20 – 25Kb/s consumption just in the act of being displayed in the remote screen, so typically it was hidden until needed.

Conclusions:

• RDP7 is definitely an improvement – and provides a much clearer and cleaner display
  • Gone are the old days of RDP presenting the screen with 6 or 7 horizontal bars from left to right and top to bottom
  • It does appear able to deliver quite reasonable Video today
  • It does not appear to have delivered much or any improvements in Flash

written by dcaddick

If installing Citrix XenDesktop Receiver on any HP Thin Client with Windows XPe *prior* to the most recent release (Build 710) you may get an error, even after removing the original Citrix Client, that it is unable to install because of a previous Citrix Client install still exists…  I didn’t really waste any time on looking for the root cause as to whether it’s caused by the Uninstall routine of the preinstalled Citrix Client or other components…

Here’s the way I got it to work manually:

• Log on as Administrator
• Uninstall the Citrix Program Neighborhood client
• Delete the registry key HKClassesRoot\Software\Microsoft\Installer\Products\086B4262CB2…. (I didn’t write it all down)
             Search for “Citrix” in RegEdit, It’ll be very near the top
• Install Desktop Receiver Embedded Edition v11.10

The other alternative would be to re-image the device before you start with the most recent release?

And to set the the device to load the logon web page directly, set the registry entry:

• HKLM\Software\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion\WinLogon
• Shell = c:\progra~1\intern~1\iexplore.exe –k http://<ddc>/Citrix/DesktopAppliance

written by dcaddick

I just wanted folks to know that there’s some new testing results out that would appear to indicate that with XenApp being virtualized on XenServer there is minimal overhead so long as you are not pushing the XenApp servers above 80% CPU

<snip>

A 4P/24C3 HP ProLiant BL685c G6 server blade equipped with the Six-Core AMD Opteron processor Model 8435 (2.6 GHz) can provide optimal support for up to 500 users when running HP’s most aggressive test workload (as described in User profile) in a 64-bit HP Server Based Computing (HP SBC) environment.

As a result of this and earlier test efforts, HP recommends enabling BBWC on HP SBC servers.

When the workload was virtualized, this HP ProLiant BL685c G6 server blade was able to support as many as 500 users, indicating that, for this particular configuration, virtualization overhead was negligible. However, common sense dictates that you are likely to encounter virtualization overhead with any HP ProLiant server platform running Citrix XenServer. Thus, HP extended this testing to compare the maximum – rather than optimal – numbers of users supported by bare-metal and virtualized configurations. These additional tests indicated that, with a maximum workload, there was a virtualization overhead of 30% – 33% for the tested configurations.

Since your production workload will not exactly match the workload used by HP for the testing described in this document, HP recommends sizing your HP ProLiant server platform to accommodate a virtualization overhead of at least 10% – 20%4.

more at….
Performance of HP ProLiant BL685c G6 with Six-Core AMD Opteron 8400 Series processors (2.6 GHz) in a 64-bit HP SBC environment

written by dcaddick