It's really amazing what ends up taking more time and effort, isn't it...
So the other day a prospect who's been running Horizon View for several years now and been unsuccessful at virtualizing a lot of their apps told our partner that they flatly did not believe we could layer their difficult apps. Four they pointed out as examples and requested to see layered in real time were Visual Studio, Photoshop, Quark Express, and Microsoft Navision. This is completely understandable as these are very difficult apps that are rather infamously difficult to virtualize and are almost always crammed into a special gold image for a specific subset of users in the Horizon View world. They've been struggling with these four in particular for years.
I responded to the partner by offering to layer those apps in real time, although a huge chunk of that time would literally be watching progress bars move along (these installers take a long time).
To layer the apps, provision them each to a desktop, and launch the apps to show they work (well 3 of the 4 as I couldn't find an installer for Navision) took me just over an hour.
An hour of a sales guy's time to layer 3 apps that have been pains for years. Unidesk is some powerful stuff, man.
Here's the video. I'm *not* a professional vlogger so it's pretty bad, ha. But you get the idea - it's easy and powerful.
https://vimeo.com/140055906
~Micah
Saturday, September 26, 2015
Wednesday, September 16, 2015
wait...wait...what? tow a Prius with a DeLorean?
Weird title, I know. But today I finally spoke with a Microsoft licensing expert about this and if I understand it, there seriously aren't any other moving parts to this for private-cloud end user virtualizatoin...
Seems to me that buying a connection broker like Citrix, VMware, vWorkspace, whatever - is more than a little bit like buying a Prius to ferry your groceries back and forth, and then buying a Delorean to tow it with.. (For the record, I think Deloreans are really friggin cool...but the Prius does grocery ferrying pretty damn well...and apaprently can haul some ass too http://www.roadandtrack.com/motorsports/videos/a26134/v8-prius-race-car/ )
There are two things from Microsoft you need in order to run VDI. First is a "guest" OS license (these are the virtual machines which users connect to). Second is an access license.
Both of these factors go from extremely simple to hideously complex in about two seconds. So walk with me carefully.
On the simple side, let's look at Server 2012R2. With Server 2012R2, this is what you need:
1. A Server 2012R2 Datacenter license per 2 sockets.
2. A RDS Per-User CAL per physical user
The Datacenter license covers both the hypervisor, management VMs, RDS brokers, and unlimited OS instances which will be your users' desktops. These desktops will run as a Server OS and can be fairly easily modified to behave almost exactly like their consumer counterparts. MSRP for a Datacenter license is about USD 6000. Following VMware's recommendations for host density, you can get between 50 and 100 VDI users on a single dual-socket host, which gives you the guest OS license for a maximum of about $120 (assuming the conservative 50 users per host). Do note that I've spoken with many schools who have a campus agreement in place which gives them Datacenter licenses for about USD 250...so I don't think many people actually pay $6k for a Datacenter license.
The RDS Per-User CAL is where it gets really simple. In this model, each VDI instance is basically a single-session RDSH from a licensing perspective. RDSH access is not limited by the enduser's client OS; you can use any OS/endpoint to access the session. That's it...just buy an RDS license and your users can access their VDI from any OS, and as many devices as they want. This is the Prius in the weird metaphor, because while the CAL is for client access, RDS itself is also an actual connection broker...and includes a pretty damn good transmission protocol with it, plus a security server function...meaning that buying another connection broker is just that: another connection broker that you still need Microsoft access rights for. I'll get back to the metaphor later.
But this is pretty simple, right? Why does Microsoft get such a bad rep for having hideously complex licensing, and why did I use that exact word to describe it myself just a scant few sentences ago?
Well, licensing for the consumer OSes is radically different. Seems Microsoft were (are?) keen to promote the use of Windows-based endpoint devices instead of Chromebooks, Macs, and Linux-based clients. They are also looking to get an annual payment out of businesses who do remote access/VDI. Which makes sense, of course, from a business perspective - maximize profits, resistance is futile.
So, your choices for virtualizing the Windows consumer OSes are pretty complex in practice. If you buy Software Assurance (SA) on your endpoints, you get a copy of the OS that you can virtualize. Some SA agreements also allow the user of that endpoint to use a personal computer (as long as it's a Windows-based personal computer). That is, they *must* be the primary user of an SA-licensed physical work computer in order to have home access as well. If that user wants to use a system with a different OS like an Android or iOS device, or a Chromebook, or literally anything that isn't running a Windows OS, you must purchase a VDA (Virtual Desktop Access) CAL, which in the consumer OS model serves as the access license.
So...to clarify with an example...Steve is in inside management consulting. He comes in every day to the office and sits down in front of a physical machine running Windows 7 under Software Assurance. Steve happens to like using his VDI because it's specced higher than his low-end endpoint device, so he uses his VDI as his daily driver. For a week every other month, Steve works from home where he uses his Mac to access his VDI instead. Plus, when he travels, he uses his Android convertible to access his VDI.
Under the consumer VDI model, you'd basically need to have a per-user VDA license on top of SA for this user, and all users like him.
What if you don't have or want SA? No problem - in that case you just need to buy VDA. But you have to decide, basically on a per-user basis, whether it makes more sense to buy a per-device VDA license or a per-user VDA license (which is more expensive). If your user only ever uses the physical machine they sit in front of, might make sense to bite the bullet and buy SA. If your user only ever uses a single personal Windows machine (e.g BYOD), might make sense to buy per-device VDA.
So the conversation is pretty damn complex when you want to use a consumer OS for your VDI. Why bother? I personally use a 2012R2 instance on my home machine for gaming, web surfing, document creation, etc...it's extremely capable and seems even snappier because a lot of the silly services that start with a consumer OS are disabled by default.
Now back to the analogy...towing a Prius with a DeLorean.
If you go with the server model outlined above, none of the headaches and questions of the consumer model come up. It's an extremely simple conversation. You need to know how many users you'll have, and how many hosts you'll need to support those servers. That's it. You buy a Datacenter SKU for each 2 sockets in your hosts, and a per-user RDS CAL for each user. Users can fire up the Microsoft Remote Desktop Services client on as many of their personal devices as they want, or access it from corporate systems or thin or zero clients, or any mix. You can provision VDI or RDSH sessions per user with impunity, whichever model makes more sense (you get better user density per host with session based computing, so simple users should do this). It just works and it's affordable - like a Prius.
But the crazy thing about this model is that it also includes the connection broker. RDS (Remote Desktop Services) is the name of Microsoft's connection brokering platform for both VDI and RDSH, which includes RemoteFX (RDP advanced). RDS is a perfectly capable system, with some of the world's largest end user virtualization projects running on it. The management tools are minimal (MS doesn't even recommend more than a maximum of about 200 VDI users under management with the off-the-shelf tools), but the broker and protocol are very performant. It's cheap, it's capable, and it does grocery ferrying really damn well. Prius.
So when you buy Horizon View or XenDesktop or vWorkspace, you still have to pay for RDS...which means you're buying a connection broker in order to use a different connection broker. Now, those other brokers have some neat bells and whistles which could be really important! Gull-wing doors, stainless steel construction...those might be really important to your business. But in this case you're hitching up your Prius behind the DeLorean and towing it - the groceries are still being stored in the Prius (Windows is still from Microsoft). However DeLoreans are not cheap, they have their own set of limits and challenges, and they're super expensive to maintain because it's a very specialized knowledge set.
And you _already own_ a damn Prius...just drive it.
Seems to me that buying a connection broker like Citrix, VMware, vWorkspace, whatever - is more than a little bit like buying a Prius to ferry your groceries back and forth, and then buying a Delorean to tow it with.. (For the record, I think Deloreans are really friggin cool...but the Prius does grocery ferrying pretty damn well...and apaprently can haul some ass too http://www.roadandtrack.com/motorsports/videos/a26134/v8-prius-race-car/ )
There are two things from Microsoft you need in order to run VDI. First is a "guest" OS license (these are the virtual machines which users connect to). Second is an access license.
Both of these factors go from extremely simple to hideously complex in about two seconds. So walk with me carefully.
On the simple side, let's look at Server 2012R2. With Server 2012R2, this is what you need:
1. A Server 2012R2 Datacenter license per 2 sockets.
2. A RDS Per-User CAL per physical user
The Datacenter license covers both the hypervisor, management VMs, RDS brokers, and unlimited OS instances which will be your users' desktops. These desktops will run as a Server OS and can be fairly easily modified to behave almost exactly like their consumer counterparts. MSRP for a Datacenter license is about USD 6000. Following VMware's recommendations for host density, you can get between 50 and 100 VDI users on a single dual-socket host, which gives you the guest OS license for a maximum of about $120 (assuming the conservative 50 users per host). Do note that I've spoken with many schools who have a campus agreement in place which gives them Datacenter licenses for about USD 250...so I don't think many people actually pay $6k for a Datacenter license.
The RDS Per-User CAL is where it gets really simple. In this model, each VDI instance is basically a single-session RDSH from a licensing perspective. RDSH access is not limited by the enduser's client OS; you can use any OS/endpoint to access the session. That's it...just buy an RDS license and your users can access their VDI from any OS, and as many devices as they want. This is the Prius in the weird metaphor, because while the CAL is for client access, RDS itself is also an actual connection broker...and includes a pretty damn good transmission protocol with it, plus a security server function...meaning that buying another connection broker is just that: another connection broker that you still need Microsoft access rights for. I'll get back to the metaphor later.
But this is pretty simple, right? Why does Microsoft get such a bad rep for having hideously complex licensing, and why did I use that exact word to describe it myself just a scant few sentences ago?
Well, licensing for the consumer OSes is radically different. Seems Microsoft were (are?) keen to promote the use of Windows-based endpoint devices instead of Chromebooks, Macs, and Linux-based clients. They are also looking to get an annual payment out of businesses who do remote access/VDI. Which makes sense, of course, from a business perspective - maximize profits, resistance is futile.
So, your choices for virtualizing the Windows consumer OSes are pretty complex in practice. If you buy Software Assurance (SA) on your endpoints, you get a copy of the OS that you can virtualize. Some SA agreements also allow the user of that endpoint to use a personal computer (as long as it's a Windows-based personal computer). That is, they *must* be the primary user of an SA-licensed physical work computer in order to have home access as well. If that user wants to use a system with a different OS like an Android or iOS device, or a Chromebook, or literally anything that isn't running a Windows OS, you must purchase a VDA (Virtual Desktop Access) CAL, which in the consumer OS model serves as the access license.
So...to clarify with an example...Steve is in inside management consulting. He comes in every day to the office and sits down in front of a physical machine running Windows 7 under Software Assurance. Steve happens to like using his VDI because it's specced higher than his low-end endpoint device, so he uses his VDI as his daily driver. For a week every other month, Steve works from home where he uses his Mac to access his VDI instead. Plus, when he travels, he uses his Android convertible to access his VDI.
Under the consumer VDI model, you'd basically need to have a per-user VDA license on top of SA for this user, and all users like him.
What if you don't have or want SA? No problem - in that case you just need to buy VDA. But you have to decide, basically on a per-user basis, whether it makes more sense to buy a per-device VDA license or a per-user VDA license (which is more expensive). If your user only ever uses the physical machine they sit in front of, might make sense to bite the bullet and buy SA. If your user only ever uses a single personal Windows machine (e.g BYOD), might make sense to buy per-device VDA.
So the conversation is pretty damn complex when you want to use a consumer OS for your VDI. Why bother? I personally use a 2012R2 instance on my home machine for gaming, web surfing, document creation, etc...it's extremely capable and seems even snappier because a lot of the silly services that start with a consumer OS are disabled by default.
Now back to the analogy...towing a Prius with a DeLorean.
If you go with the server model outlined above, none of the headaches and questions of the consumer model come up. It's an extremely simple conversation. You need to know how many users you'll have, and how many hosts you'll need to support those servers. That's it. You buy a Datacenter SKU for each 2 sockets in your hosts, and a per-user RDS CAL for each user. Users can fire up the Microsoft Remote Desktop Services client on as many of their personal devices as they want, or access it from corporate systems or thin or zero clients, or any mix. You can provision VDI or RDSH sessions per user with impunity, whichever model makes more sense (you get better user density per host with session based computing, so simple users should do this). It just works and it's affordable - like a Prius.
But the crazy thing about this model is that it also includes the connection broker. RDS (Remote Desktop Services) is the name of Microsoft's connection brokering platform for both VDI and RDSH, which includes RemoteFX (RDP advanced). RDS is a perfectly capable system, with some of the world's largest end user virtualization projects running on it. The management tools are minimal (MS doesn't even recommend more than a maximum of about 200 VDI users under management with the off-the-shelf tools), but the broker and protocol are very performant. It's cheap, it's capable, and it does grocery ferrying really damn well. Prius.
So when you buy Horizon View or XenDesktop or vWorkspace, you still have to pay for RDS...which means you're buying a connection broker in order to use a different connection broker. Now, those other brokers have some neat bells and whistles which could be really important! Gull-wing doors, stainless steel construction...those might be really important to your business. But in this case you're hitching up your Prius behind the DeLorean and towing it - the groceries are still being stored in the Prius (Windows is still from Microsoft). However DeLoreans are not cheap, they have their own set of limits and challenges, and they're super expensive to maintain because it's a very specialized knowledge set.
And you _already own_ a damn Prius...just drive it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)