| FAQ about the best storage practices for high def | | | | variety of VM Infrastructure - Microsoft's Hyper-V, |
| VDI. | | | | Citrix XenServer, or VMware ESX. By contrast, |
| | | | | VMware View ties an IT organization to only |
| FAQ: We are interested in implementing VDI but | | | | VMware ESX. This gives the customers the |
| are concerned about the upfront Capital | | | | flexibility to choose the most powerful cost-effective |
| Expenditure. How can I roll this out cost effectively, | | | | best-of-breed VDI solution. |
| given a limited budget? | | | | 4. Policy-based access control: The Citrix |
| Answer: While a complete cutover from distributed | | | | + Netapp VDI solution leverages a familiar Microsoft |
| desktops to hosted VDI entails significant capital | | | | and/or Citrix management user interface for |
| expenditure, it is possible to implement VDI using a | | | | managing granular - by user groups or individuals - |
| phased approach. You can use your older legacy | | | | access to data and applications. |
| (> 3 years old) desktops with hosted virtual | | | | Question: When backing up and restoring a user's |
| desktops, thereby extending your desktop refresh | | | | virtual desktop, is it possible to only backup/restore a |
| cycle. For desktops which are already up for | | | | user's MyDocuments or data folders? |
| refresh, consider using your desktop refresh budget | | | | Answer: Yes, it is possible to use Netapp |
| to replace your desktops and laptops with thin clients | | | | technology to back up entire VM's or just specific |
| in a complete hosted VDI approach. Then when | | | | sets of user data. |
| your older legacy desktops must be replaced, you | | | | |
| can subsequently replace them with thin clients and | | | | Question: Today we obtain OEM licenses for |
| or laptops. | | | | Windows OS via the HW vendor. If we use VDI - do |
| | | | | we have to buy expensive Microsoft OS licenses? |
| FAQ: Is there any kind of guideline (CPU, memory, | | | | Doesn't that increase our costs? |
| etc.) for deciding between productivity, knowledge, | | | | Answer: While VDI requires purchasing Microsoft |
| and power worker/user? Miscategorizing someone | | | | Virtual Enterprise Centralized Desktop OS licenses, |
| could be a painful mistake. | | | | the net costs can be approximately equivalent to |
| Answer: This is certainly a "your mileage may vary" | | | | what one pays today for local desktop OS licenses. |
| area, but we have published some discussions about | | | | You need one Microsoft Virtual Enterprise Centralized |
| designing desktops for a variety of use cases in a | | | | Desktop (VECD) license per device, which allows the |
| design paper on our website. Typically pilots start | | | | licensed device to access up to four virtual desktops |
| with similar allocations of CPU and RAM as the | | | | concurrently. More desktop instances could be |
| physical device they are currently using. The nice | | | | centrally stored, but not accessed at the same time |
| thing is that in a VM you certainly have the ability to | | | | by the same device, without purchasing an additional |
| adjust the virtual resources without a screwdriver | | | | VECD license. |
| | | | | |
| FAQ: What differentiates the Citrix + Netapp VDI | | | | |
| solution from the one from VMware? | | | | Question: What about support for USB devices? |
| Answer: The Citrix + Netapp VDI solution differs | | | | Special keyboard (like Bloomberg), video cameras, |
| from the one from VMware in four key areas: | | | | multi-button mice, etc... |
| 1. User Experience: Citrix's HDX | | | | Answer: Citrix XenDesktop supports many USB |
| Technologies optimizes the user experience by | | | | devices via its HDX Technologies. Many |
| leveraging integrated client/endpoint-, server-, or | | | | USB devices such as SmartPhones, mice, keyboard, |
| network side technologies to allow users an optimal | | | | scanners, printers, smart cards, graphics tablets work |
| high definition user experience to a broad range of | | | | right out of the gate. There are a couple keys on |
| applications - streaming media, Flash, audio, 3D | | | | the Bloomberg keyboard that require some more |
| graphics, etc - over both the Local Area Network | | | | development work to claim complete support. |
| and the Wide Area Network. This is in stark | | | | Support for isochronous devices - like webcams - is |
| contrast to VMware View, which will work for LAN | | | | under development and planned for an upcoming |
| use cases, but not for the WAN. | | | | release. |
| 2. Application Management: The Citrix + | | | | |
| Netapp VDI solution includes integrated XenApp, | | | | Question: What is the best way to handle Outlook |
| Citrix's proven application virtualization solution, which | | | | OST files inside a Thin Provisioned virtual machine? |
| works with 1000's of Windows applications, in either | | | | We have a client that must have cached mode on in |
| a Hosted or Streamed mode. VMware View | | | | Outlook, and using Standard Image Mode, we would |
| integrates with VMware's ThinApp application | | | | have to flex that giant file with the user's profile. |
| virtualization technology. However, the VMware | | | | Answer: Yes, a best practice for handling Outlook |
| View solution requires bundling all delivered | | | | OST files is to store the OST files on a |
| applications into the VM, which makes application | | | | network-shared and accessible drive so the user |
| delivery much more cumbersome and difficult to | | | | Outlook data follows the users, wherever he or she |
| manage. | | | | may be. It is therefore necessary to store the user |
| 3. Flexibility: The Citrix + Netapp VDI | | | | OST files with the user's profile accordingly. |
| solution offers IT organizations the flexibility to use a | | | | |