I’m writing off the Client Side Type 1 Hypervisor…
8 comments, 3213 views
I have been giving a lot of thought to client side virtualization lately, specifically the idea of type 1 hypervisors on x86 machines. After all this time I have decided that they aren’t worth any more brain cycles (I have few to spare). Back in 2006 I wrote about the client side hypervisor at Brian Madden’s site and was really excited about what I might see by 2009… What did all that excitement get me? Nada. Zip. Nothing. Client side hypervisors today suck. Their mgmt. tools aren’t any good, and they really don’t make IT’s job any easier.
A hypervisor solution for PCs that gains any traction will come from MS and will essentially be Hyper-V for desktops. Anything else is a waste of time for the foreseeable future. Could my mind be changed? Maybe. Could I be completely wrong? Sure. Obviously I was wrong when I wrote about my excitement for these clients in 2006!
Ron's basic timeline for the type 1’s:
- Talk started in the community around 2006
- By 2008/9 pretty much EVERYONE was SURE we would have type 1 client side hypervisors readily available today. Hell we thought it would be an option when you bought that new laptop!
- Citrix and VMware were going to be battling in that space and small startups were hoping they were far enough ahead of the big boys to get bought or get traction
- By 2010 VMware had given up on the Type 1 on the client and Citrix was dealing with what was basically a 3rd gen prototype that supported a handful of laptops.
This year…
- Citrix announces XenClient 2.0… everyone yawns
So, I am done with the Type1 on the client. I am sick of waiting for one that supports more than a handful of hardware configurations and doesn't choke on standard peripherals. Yes, client hypervisors are extremely complicated. Support for drivers and devices is a NIGHTMARE. I understand. And, yes I will probably get a bunch of emails telling me who has one now, and how it’s better than Citrix or supports more than I think... whatever. Don’t waste your keystrokes. Let’s face it: Even with the 2 or 3 that are available now, people aren’t really seeing a use for them. I see a few uses, but most organizations don't even see that… and I think I know why.
Companies get the idea of the hypervisor in the datacenter. Yes you have to patch and manage a hypervisor on that Dell or HP server, but you get to stack 20 or 40 or 80 VMs on it for your trouble. The price you pay is pretty small compared to the savings. But, on the client side, the story is completely different. You will basically have to manage a Type 1 for 1 or 2 VMs on that desktop. Then setup a management infrastructure to manage the hypervisor AND the Windows VM sitting on top of it. This management layer for Windows may (OR MAY NOT) be the same tools you use today. If it is the same tools, what the hell did you buy the hypervisor for!? If it’s not, well that is yet ANOTHER tool you have to add to your environment to manage a subset of the Windows machines. Oh, and as a bonus, you can’t get rid of the “other” management tools because the hypervisor you bought only supports like 8 specific models of machines.... talk about a pain. Why deal with it?
The other problem I am starting to see with the client hypervisor is the direction client devices are moving today. Much like all desktop virtualization, some in IT thought that we could just place a hypervisor on the client and benefits in administration and cost would magically rain down upon us from the IT gods…. I guess that is all that happened on the server side right? We dropped a hypervisor on our servers and magically your datacenter looked like that stupid IBM commercial right?
Wrong. There was a lot of thought about how virtual machines and hypervisors would benefit the datacenter and IT operations. The results of a consolidation effort were clear LONG BEFORE the technology was even ready for prime time enterprise usage. On the client side it seems like (at least to me) that those of us championing the client side hypervisor are force feeding a product into an environment that hasn’t even figured out what the benefits will be. It’s the exact opposite of the datacenter virtualization play.
And then, as you look at clients and how people work today, you see the iPads, Smart phones, book readers, etc etc. The market is dictating small, powerful, always changing, flexible devices. And most of these devices are not your typical x86 laptop that we envisioned the type 1 hypervisor sitting on. Hell, my wife is totally enamored with that commercial showing a phone w/ a keyboard & monitor. How many of you wouldn’t KILL to have a phone that could also replace your laptop? Think it won’t happen? Eventually? Sure it will. And where does the x86 client side hypervisor fit in that world?
Answer: It doesn’t.
These next gen devices may connect to a desktop somewhere (hosted at your home or your datacenter or wherever) and will have the ability to run a bunch of apps locally just like the iPads and phones of today. The user won’t need a local hypervisor, so why pay for the overhead (in hardware perf, management and license costs)? Windows or Windows apps will just be another app accessed by these devices… Windows (as far as these devices are concerned) basically becomes a streamed version of Angry Birds.
The Type1 Hypervisor is / was a pipe dream. It was thought that it could change Windows management and that was the real driver behind a lot of enthusiasm in our world. Managing distributed Windows desktops just plain sucks. All of the tools out there have every option you could imagine, and that makes them complex, and complexity leads to failures. But the Client Hypervisor isn’t the fix for that, therefore it has limited use to IT for the foreseeable future, and I am done with it.
Ron’s Politically Incorrect VDI Blog
Too many organizations are out there trying to implement VDI and failing. Whether you like what Ron has to say or not, he is here to say what others won’t about VDI and help you get it right in your environment. Get Ron’s advice… raw…unfiltered… without the sugar coating.
 |
Comments
a final thought on why NxTop works well - we've been doing this for a, relatively, long time. Virtual Computer started building a Type 1 Hypervisor and Management solution, NxTop, 4 years ago. Ian Pratt and Peter Blum began XenClient about 2 years ago and limited themselves to the vPro platform, which isn't necessarily flying off the shelves. That said, vPro has very cool features enabling intelligent desktop virtuailzation and management epecially KVM, AMT, TXT, and VT-d.
These are interesting days for desktop virtualization and you should really try a functional Type 1 hypervisor and management solution before bashing the entire concept. The real question should be why hasn't VDI taken off, especially since it's been around for many years and is being pushed by the big guys? Is it because VDI is crazy expensive regardless of what solution you use, requires significant infrastructure and networking, is totally inflexible, and only works when connected to the internet? who wants to buy VDI?
Ron,
first - thanks for reading my post. You raise an excellent question and I cannot speak directly for Citrix or VMWare, although I have pretty good insight having worked closely with the XenClient team and Scott Davis of VMWare. Cmopared to NxTop, Citrix developed a completely different architecture in their Type 1 hypervisor partly based on a co-development with Intel to support vPro features (especially VT-d). Citrix put a lot of money into limiting XenClient to vPro machines believing Dell and HP were going to sell a million expensive vPro machines. They also built XenClient to be the agnostic hypervisor they can OEM to any management console, instead of creating management capabilities themselves (granted, if you buy Synchronizer and XenDesktop you can get some functionality - if they work and for $500 per end point, whereas NxTop is $150 per endpoint). You are correct that XenClient has a very limited HCL, but they are not focused on XenClient when XenApp is still their main product. VMWare pulled out of the CVP project because they need a verified market to support their investment. They've been very interested in our solution, but only when we can deliver $100MN in revenue. When that day does arrive, I won't really care about VMWare. My belief is they are 100% focused upon their server business and their Type 2 View / Fusion is an easy extension of ESX/VMDK (plus, they invested in Teradici and are playing PCoIP as the protocol). Now, you posed a very provocative point saying Microsoft is best positioned to deliver a Type 1 Hypervisor - to this we are in agreement. It would be great if Win8 has a Type1 - there is a lot of indications is will. We would more than welcome a Hyper-V based client hypervisor because for us the value has always been in our management console - not the hypervisor. Unfortunately, we are a small company and very few people are aware of our solution because all they hear about is XenClient. Plus, I believe Citrix and VMWare are very VDI + thin client oriented. Both companies are heavily promoting VDI in the field because their key products, XenApp and View, are server based. Citrix is not dependent upon the success of XenClient. Our company is 100% focused upon our NxTop solution and delivering the value of a Type 1 hypervisor and management combination. For our validation, though, we announced our strategic relationship with Lenovo a month ago and were in their booth at Synergy. Lenovo chose NxTop over all other (not that they are many) options to provide intelligent desktop virtualization capabilities direct from their factory. We are on Lenovo's price list, shipping today, and have already won joint customers.
When Microsoft delivers their Type 1 hypervisor with Win8 we will finally be "acknowledged" and ready to fully manage their environment. Until then, we need to prove ourselves everyday to the innovative IT professionals using NxTop. I understand you are sick of the technology, but if you give NxTop a try you will certainly be surprised.
Go Cubs!
Jim
Ron,
Agreed on the Type 1 Hypervisor (maybe an exepcition for NxTop, but I didn't try them so I can't say ;))
And I also hope on such a hypervisor for tablets.. Till then, VMware View, and Unidesk RULE :P
Jim,
Read your comment all the way. just wanted to say I read it... Still sick of Type 1's.
And maybe you can answer this for me... If you guys can handle thousands of models and configurations and peripherals are not an issue... WTH is going on with other ones? What is their problem? Because you and I both know a technology almost always has to be acknowledged by the big guys to at least have a chance.... and the poor implementation so far gives consumers the bad taste in their mouth.
If you guys have truly figured it all out, what holds back everyone else vs NxTop? Why does everything work there but not in XenClient?
Arjan,
Very true. COULD a hypervisor have an impact on tablets and other devices we haven't even seen yet as end-users? HELL YEAH! and I hope so.
My focus here is strictly on the Type 1 client side hypervisor for x86 machines. basically.... they have been a big bust. a technical achievement somewhat to date but doing nothing for me as an IT guy trying to manage desktops.
Ron,
I certainly respect your post and may be wasting my keystrokes, but have you tried Virtual Computer's NxTop Solution? NxTop is the only true Type 1 Hypervisor with a management console in the market - XenClient is just a hypervisor. The scenario you describe is not applicable to NxTop because you can manage Windows direct from our console. Plus, NxTop supports over 1000 different platforms, not 8. Since we have the ability to manage our VM's and Windows from our console, there are many benefits to IT. We have over 100 customers utiliznig NxTop for various puposes, such as true remote support with integrated help desk/KVM, 100% patch success, locked down policy controlled corporate images (reduce end user system admin rights), security against lost or stolen clients with AES-NI data encryption/remote kill/lockout capabilities, lower cost and oeprational efficiecny with one to many centralized management (one server can manage thousands of clients), greater end user and IT flexiblity - run vm's disconnected / provide a corportate locked down image and personal public image / easy Win7 migrations with XP & Win7 on same machine, etc. etc. etc. Whereas VDI is costly, requires significant IT infrastructure and networking, and is tethered to the internet, NxTop delivers a cost effective alternative to desktop virtualization. Before you totally write off Type 1 Hypervisors, you should try NxTop - which you can get for free on our website or have installed direct from factory with Lenovo.
If you made it this far, then thanks for the consideration.
Cheers,
Jim
Hi Ron,
I must agree with you on almost everything, but there is one exception. You say (and I quote):
"These next gen devices may connect to a desktop somewhere (hosted at your home or your datacenter or wherever) and will have the ability to run a bunch of apps locally just like the iPads and phones of today. The user won’t need a local hypervisor, so why pay for the overhead (in hardware perf, management and license costs)? Windows or Windows apps will just be another app accessed by these devices"
The point you're making that a iPad or phones don't need a local hypervisor is not true in my opinion (and I think VMware agrees). As you say a user will accessing his/her apps through whatever device is "in" their hands at that moment. For some this might be a phone (or tablet) most of the time. And I believe the youth already shows how much that usage will be (some would even sell a kidney for an iPad ;)). BYOD is a great concept but needs to be managed (I know, yet another management tool). To give a user the ability to switch between work and privat will be essential, and managing this the right way, "might/will" become key.
Looking at the way VMware is going with their products:
http://www.vmware.com/products/mobile/overview.html and http://www.vmware.com/products/desktop_virtualization/horizon/
you're view on the Hypervisor 1 for Desktops is spot on.... But for tablets and phones that might be a whole different ball game :)
Have a great weekend! Arjan
Hi All
A bit late to the party I guess, but anyway.
Layer 8 the company that I represent is a reseller for Virtual Computer NxTop.
In the beginning of VDI, I thought it was a great concept but after some time the issues involved with it became reality and my view on VDI is now down the trash.
Something that was supposed to be so simple to implement and also bring a lot of benefits to pc management, just didnt work in the reality.
VDI will double all the software licenses and I believe that this isnt what a IT department want. So there is no wonder that all other software companies loves VDI. An exception for this is if you using thin clients or linux clients.
Usually VDI is motivated that the users can have thier own VDI it will be just like your own PC, yeah sure, NOT ;-). But sadly the truth is that mostly VDIs is so restricted that there is no difference between running VDI versus using a RDP session to a Terminal Server.
Also I believe that Virtual Computers approach is not targeting the VDI market it is more competitive to deployment tools market than VDI. But NxTop will actual make the customer realize that he can throw the VDI project out the window. And use NxTop and still have control of almost all PCs in the company with features like below
remote kill
active directory integration
patch managment
lock out
thin client os
simple windows xp to win 7 to win 8 migrations
disk encryption
and many many more features.
Regards
Niklas
Layer 8
Post new comment