Posts Tagged ‘pcoip’

h1

Short-Take: VMware View PCoIP Client for Android

July 15, 2011

Today VMware released a “Tech Preview” version of VMware’s View Client for Android: a PCoIP-only client suitable for LAN and WAN (via PCoIP Secure Gateway). We’ve had a quick first look this evening when the application appeared on Android Market – a free download – and it looks great. On my NotionInk Adam tablet (NVidia 1GHz dual-core) running Honeycomb 3.0.1 the display updates where just as snappy as my iPad2 running View Client for iPad. The only problem I experienced in the hour or so of working with the client is the lack of three-finger support in the Adam/Honeycomb port to spawn the pop-up keyboard.

The View PCoIP Client for Android supports the same saved desktop icon paradigm as it's iPad predecessor for quick access.

The View PCoIP Client for Android allows for desktop connections to stay active even when the app is not in the foreground - a one-up on the iPad predecessor.

Android View PCoIP Client - Task switching to other Android application

Task switching in View PCoIP Client for Android works just like any other Android application.

Android View PCoIP Client - Retrieving a View desktop from background

View PCoIP Client for Android is easily restored from the background without reconnection delays.

And yes, that last screen shot shows 1-bar on AT&T’s 3G network and it’s totally useable just like on the iPad. If you’re waiting for a rocking View client before plunking down money on that 10.1″ ASUS EEpad Transformer (now with Honeycomb 3.1) and it’s keyboard/mousepad “docking” station (complete with additional run-time doubling battery) then wait no more: Android has arrived. Remember though, this is just a “Tech Preview” and the apple needs a bit more polishing before you go running to your CIO…

SOLORI’s Note: Although the View Client for Android was “optimized” for 1280×800 format, it still had no problem with the more limited 1024×600 Pixel Qi display on my NotionInk Adam. In fact, changes in rotation on the Android seemed faster than on iPad2 and multitasking on the Honeycomb system did no seemed to be affected to a backgrounded desktop.

As another test to compatibility, I tested small-screen PCoIP goodness on my Samsung Fascinate and it rocks! Beware, there is just enough display to be useful with the pop-up keyboard on-screen, however and the scroll-back on the screen with keyboard in foreground made for interesting URL entry while trying to get to Hulu, but audio was clear and frame rates at about 3-5 fps (visual est.) but very clear. Task switching on the single-core Android Froyo device worked flawlessly too.

How did Hulu fare on Honeycomb? Unfortunately it was not up to scratch in full screen, but I found it passable in the embedded mode (Mozilla 3.6). This kind of performance issue will likely be very platform dependent on Android version, CPU, display and vendor tweaks to the Google Android kernel – especially hacked kernels like the NI Adam (tested). Unlike the Apple-controlled IOS, Android leaves a lot of performance enhancements to platform providers and most just pass-on the reference kernel without significant improvement in performance. For a “preview” release, Team Fox at VMware has delivered the goods.

VMware’s official blog post has a quick walk-through video. A User Guide and Release Notes are also available from VMware.

h1

Short-Take: VMware View, What’s Up with PCoIP?

March 21, 2011

Isn’t it time you looked at what VMware View and PCoIP have to offer? Now that there is a server off-load card supporting View PCoIP virtual machines, the overhead of display processing opens-up opportunities for denser View servers (or does it?) Here’s what VMware says about PCoIP in the “VMware View Architecture Planning Guide, View 4.6”

VMware View with PCoIP
PCoIP is a new high-performance remote display protocol provided by VMware. This protocol is available for View desktops that are sourced from virtual machines, Teradici clients, and physical machines that have Teradici-enabled host cards.

PCoIP can compensate for an increase in latency or a reduction in bandwidth, to ensure that end users can remain productive regardless of network conditions. PCoIP is optimized for delivery of images, audio, and video content for a wide range of users on the LAN or across the WAN. PCoIP provides the following features:

  • You can use up to 4 monitors and adjust the resolution for each monitor separately, up to 2560 x 1600 resolution per display.
  • You can copy and paste text between the local system and the View desktop, but you cannot copy and paste system objects such as folders and files between systems.
  • PCoIP supports 32-bit color.
  • PCoIP supports 128-bit encryption.
  • PCoIP supports Advanced Encryption Standard (AES) encryption, which is turned on by default.
  • For users outside the corporate firewall, you can use this protocol with your company’s virtual private network or with View security servers.
  • MMR is not supported on Windows 7 clients or virtual desktops.
    • Although MMR is not supported on Windows 7 virtual desktops, if the Windows 7 desktop has 1GB of
      RAM and 2 virtual CPUs, you can use PCoIP to play 480p- and 720p-formatted videos at native resolutions.
      For 1080p, you might need to make the window smaller than full screen size.

If you use PCoIP, the display protocol from VMware, you can adjust the display resolution and rotation
separately for each monitor. PCoIP allows a true multiple-monitor session rather than a span mode session.

  • The maximum number of monitors that you can use to display a View desktop is 10 if you use the RDP display protocol and 4 if you use PCoIP.

RAM Sizing for Specific Monitor Configurations When Using PCoIP
If you use PCoIP, the display protocol from VMware, the amount of extra RAM that the ESX host requires depends in part on the number of monitors configured for end users and on the display resolution. Table 4-1 lists the amount of overhead RAM required for various configurations. The amounts of memory listed in the columns are in addition to the amount of memory required for other PCoIP functionality.

RAM sizing for Multi-Monitor PCoIP sessions

When you consider these requirements, note that virtual machine configuration of allocated RAM does not change. That is, you do not need to allocate 1GB of RAM for applications and another 31MB for dual 1080p monitors. Instead, consider the overhead RAM when calculating the total physical RAM required for each ESX server. Add the guest operating system RAM to the overhead RAM and multiply by the number of virtual machines.

  • Software developers or other power uses with high-performance needs might have much higher CPU requirements than knowledge workers and task workers. Dual virtual CPUs are recommended for compute-intensive tasks or for Windows 7 desktops that need to play 720p video using the PCoIP display protocol.

Maximum Connections for View Connection Server
Table 4-7 provides information about the tested limits regarding the number of simultaneous connections that a VMware View deployment can accommodate.

This example assumes that you are using VMware View with vSphere 4.1 and vCenter Server 4.1. It also assumes that View Connection Server is running on a 64-bit Windows Server 2008 R2 Enterprise operating system.

Maximum Connections for View Connection Server

PCoIP Secure Gateway connections are required if you use security servers for PCoIP connections from outside the corporate network. Tunnelled connections are required if you use security servers for RDP connections from outside the corporate network and for USB and multimedia redirection (MMR) acceleration with a PCoIP Secure Gateway connection.

Network Bandwidth Considerations
For display traffic, many elements can affect network bandwidth, such as protocol used, monitor resolution and configuration, and the amount of multimedia content in the workload. Concurrent launches of streamed applications can also cause usage spikes.

Read the rest of this entry ?

h1

Short-Take: Windows 7 for iPad, Free

March 9, 2011
Windows7 running on iPad

Windows7 running on iPad

Remember that announcement about View 4.6 and the PCoIP Software Gateway (PSG) a week or so back? If the existence of PSG got your imagination drifting towards running Windows7 over PCoIP on your iPad or Android tablet, then some of you are going to be very excited and some of you will have to wait a little bit longer.

Today VMware is taking mobile desktop to a new level by announcing the general availability of the View Client for iPad V1.0 – Android tablet users will have to wait! This is a iPad-native, PCoIP-only client for View 4.6 environments (i.e. PCoIP w/PSG support) with  gesture-enabled navigation and virtual mouse pad. If you liked accessing your View desktop in Wyse’s PocketCloud for iPhone & iPad (RDP mode only), you’re going to love the View Client for iPad because it unlocks the rich, PCoIP goodness that you’ve been missing.

Last week a group of vExperts were briefed on the iPad app by its development team leader Tedd Fox who came to VMware in August, 2010 after nearly 8 years of work at Citrix (co-inventor/designer of Citrix Reciever for iPad & iPhone). To say Tedd knows iPad/mobile and remote app/desktop is an understatement, and VMware has committed to an aggressive “feature update” schedule for the iPad app on the order of every 1-2 months (typical of mobile application norms.)

Needless to say, we had a few questions. Here’s just a few of the responses from our Q/A and demonstration session:

vExpert: Will there be a iPhone link for touchpad control?

Tedd: No. Due to some patent-pending issues, we decided not to tread on that ground.

vExpert: Has it been enhanced for the iPad2?

Tedd: No. It’s [iOS] 4.3 “ready” but nobody’s got an iPad2 so no one knows if there application’s going to work. We’ve tested on dual-core architecture before, just not Apple’s dual-core architecture.

vExpert: Dual-core tested? So there’s an Android app coming?

Tedd: Android app is coming! We’re looking at mid-year for the Android. I just spent a few weeks in China getting that in alpha-alpha mode; so we actually have a UI and everything – we’re just building-up the bits… it’s going to be tablet only. It works on a 7″ right now, but we’re not sure if that’s a useful form.

vExpert: Is that because it’s too small [i.e. 7″ screen]?

Tedd: It’s because of the mouse pad and everything… it just doesn’t feel right – the resolution and everything.

vExpert: Not even with panning and side scrolling [small screen]?

Tedd: Not really. Panning a windows desktop is “okay” for like 10 minutes, after which you develop something like Tourette syndrome with curse words and all. We actually ran tests on that to figure that out, but it could change [given the right demand/use case.]

vExpert: Will it support bi-directional audio?

Tedd: No, uh, uni-directional is definitely on the roadmap so doctors can dictate and stuff like that. Otherwise, we’re going to see how the protocol matches up for [more complex] audio applications.

vExpert: Can we get more information on the Android app?

Tedd: I don’t want to get into the Android client because everything is still “in flux” and we’re still designing it…

vExpert: Will [View Client for iPad] work with bluetooth mouse and keyboard?

Tedd: Yes… You have to go into the iPad settings and pair them… then with you do the three-finger tap on the screen – like to activate the on-screen keyboard – that’s how you activate the bluetooth keyboard [only, no mouse support per Apple policy], and the [on-screen] toolbar drops down to the bottom of the screen… It’s very nice to use.

vExpert: Will it support multitasking, multiple sessions and session swapping?

Tedd: No. We’re working with Teradici on full-multitasking for one of the feature revs this year.

vExpert: It seemed that logging-in and getting to your desktop seemed pretty quick. What would you say?

Tedd: This [demo] is on 3G – by the way – so it’s fairly quick. The only [downside] is if you’re using RSA tokens: you’ve got to read the token and put it in… If the broker policy allows users to save their passwords, then you’d only need the token code.

vExpert: Is there a way to transfer data to/from the iPad from the [View client desktop]?

Tedd: Working on that – that’ll be in the next rev or two. There’s a grey area there with the shared foldering system in iOS – some people are like “yeah, awesome” but if you talk to DoD they’re like “heck no” so we’re working on an elegant solution.

vExpert: What about dropbox or something like that?

Tedd: If we have an internal solution then yes. I don’t want to be [bound by a third party] on our app – I want to keep it as “pure VMware” as possible. If the market screams for it in enough number, then of course I’m going to listen… If it’s allowed in your desktop’s environment [dropbox will work.]

vExpert: How’s the performance of the View client while other programs are in the background on the iPad?

Tedd: You don’t even notice it. If you know me you know I’ve constantly got white earbuds on. One of my test cases was working on a desktop while running on Pandora in the background.

vExpert: Price is free?

Tedd: Yeah, as long as I’m with VMware it will always be free.

Over the course of the demonstration, we saw Tedd put the application through its paces. It’s fast – even on the original iPad. The gesture interface looks well thought-out, has been thoroughly tested – Tedd says “rock solid” – and repeated three-finger abuses [rapid toggling the keyboard] won’t crash the View iPad app. Can’t wait to get it into SOLORI’s lab…

Gesture Help for iPad View Client

View Client for iPad Keyboard (three-fingers to pop-up)

View for iPad soft mouse pad and cursor keys

 

Client support for tap-hold loupe: zoom near mouse pointer.

Related Links:

[Update: View 4.x -> View 4.6 (iPad Client designed for View 4.6 and PSG). Added community blog link, virtual keyboard and loupe screenshots. Remote add -> Remote app. Added link to Andre’s VDI calculator. Clarification on bluetooth mouse support. Related links section with PCoIP off-load.]

h1

VMware PartnerExchange2010 – Day 1-2

February 9, 2010

View of the Mandalay Bay from VMware's Alumni Lounge

It’s my second day at the beautiful Mandalay Bay in Las Vegas, Nevada and VMware PartnerExchange 2010. Yesterday was filled with travel and a generous “Tailgate Party” with burgers, dogs, beverages and lots of VMware geeks! I managed to catch the last quarter of the game from the Mandalay Bay Poker Room where I added to my chip stack at the 1/2 No-Limit Texas Hold ‘Em tables. Then it was early to bed – about 9PM PST – where I studied for the upcoming VCP410 exam.

Today (Monday) was occupied with a partners-only VMware Certified Professional, Version 4, Preparation Course which outlined the VCP4 Blueprint, question examples and test-taking strategies. The “best answer,” multiple-choice format of the VCP410 exam promises to offer me some challenges as I apply black-and-white logic to a few shades-of-grey questions. The best strategy to overcome such an obstacle: read the question in its entirety, eliminate all wrong answers, then choose the answer(s) that best satisfy the entire question. A key example is this from the on-line “mock-up” exam:

What is the maximum number of vNetwork switch ports per ESX host and vCenter Server instance?

a.  4,088 for vNetwork standard switches; 4,096 for vNetwork Distributed switches

b.  4,096 for both types of switches

c.  4,088 for vNetwork standard switches; 6,000 for vNetwork distributed switches

d.  512 for both types of virtual switches

Well, it might have been obvious that “c” is the “correct” answer, but “a” is right off of Page 6 of the vSphere Configuration Maximums guide. Both are solidly “correct” answers, it’s just that “c” speaks to both the ESX question and the vCenter question making it more correct. However, neither is completely correct since vDS ports are bound by vCenter and ESX host, while vSS ports are bound only by ESX host. Since neither answer “a” or “c” specifies which limitation they are answering – host or vCenter – it is left to subjective reasoning to infer the intent. According to Jon Hall (VMware, Florida) the most ports any vNetwork switch can have in any one host is 4,088 – regardless of type. Therefore, to reach the “total virtual network ports per host (vDS and vSS ports) at least one switch of each type must exist. Alone, they can only reach 4,088 ports, however the Configuration Maximums document never spells this out for the vNetwork Distributed Switch. Hopefully this exception will be foot-noted in the next revision of the document. [Note: the additional information about vDS type vNetwork switches that  Jon logically invalidates “a” as a response.]

Following the VCP4 Prep Course, I “recharged” in the Alumni Lounge. VMware had snacks and drinks to quell the appetite and lots of power outlets to restore my iPhone and laptop. While I waited, I contacted the wife and got the 4-1-1 on our baby, checked e-mail and ran through the “mock-up” exam a couple of times. Then it was off to the Welcome Reception at the VMware Experience Hall where sponsors and exhibitors had their wares on display.

iPhone Screen Capture of the ESX Host Running Nehalem-EX, 4P/16C/32T

iPhone Screen Capture of the ESX Host Running Nehalem-EX, 4P/32C/64T

Just inside the Hall – across from the closest beverage station – was Intel’s booth and the boys in blue were demonstrating vMotion over 10GE NICs. Yes, it was fast (as you’d expect) but the real kick was the “upcoming” 10GE Base-T adapters to challenge the current price-performance leader: the 10GE Base-CR (also supporting SFP+). At under $400/port for 10GE, it’s hard to remember a reason for using 1Gbps NICs… Oh yes, the prohibitive per-port cost of 10GE switches. AristaNetworks to the rescue???

Intel was also showing their “modular server” system. Unfortunately, the current offering doesn’t allow for SAS JBOD expansion in a meaningful way (read: running NexentaStor on one/two of the “blades”), but after discussing the issue of SAS/love with the guys in the blue booth, interests were peaked. Evan, expect a call from Intel’s server group… Seriously, with 14x 2.5″ drives in a SAS Expander interconnected chassis, NexentaStor + SSD + 15K SAS would rock!

Last but not least, Intel was proudly showing their 4P, Nehalem-EX running VMware ESX with 512GB of RAM (DDR3) and demonstrating 64active threads (pictured.) This build-out offers lots of virtualization goodness at a hereto unknown price point. Suffice to say, at 1.8GHz it’s not a screamer, but the RAS features are headed in the right direction. When you rope 64-threads (about 125-250 VM’s) and 1TB worth of VM’s (yes, 1TB RAM – about $250K worth using “on-loan Samsung parts”) you are talking about a lot of “eggy in the basket.” By enhancing the RAS capabilities of these giant systems, component failure mitigation is becoming less catastrophic  – eventually allowing only a few VM’s to be impacted by a point failure instead of ALL running VM’s on the box.

vCenter ESX Host Status Showing 512GB of RAM

In case you haven’t seen an ESX host with 512GB of available RAM, check-out this screen capture (excuse the iPhone quality) to the right. That’s about $33K worth of DDR3 memory sitting in that box and assuming that the EX processors run $2K a piece and giving $6K for the remainder of the system, that’s nearly $6K/VM in this demo: fantastically decadent! Of course – and in all due fairness to the boys in blue – VM density was not the goal in this demonstration: RAS was, and the 2-bit error scrubbing – while painful as watching paint dry – is pretty cool and soon to be needed (as indicated above) for systems with this capacity.

Other vendors visited were Wyse and Xsigo. The boys in yellow (Wyse) were pimping their thin/zero clients with some compelling examples of PCoIP (Wyse 20p) and MMR (Wyse r90lew). The PCoIP demos featured end-to-end hardware Teradici cards displaying clips from Avatar, while the MMR demo featured 720p movie clips from an iMAX cut of dog fight training. While the PCoIP was impressive and flawless, the upcoming MMR enhancements – while flawed in the beta I saw – were nothing short of impressive.

No, that's not Xsigo's secret sauce: it's the chocolate fountain at VMware's Welcome Reception.

Considering that the MMR-capable thin client was running a 1.5GHz AMD Semperon, the 720p Windows Media stream looked all the better. Looking back at the virtual machine from the ESX console, only about 10-15% of a core was being consumed to “render” the video. But that’s the beauty of MMR: redirect the processor intensive decoding to the end-point and just send the stream un-decoded. While PCoIP is a win in LANs with knowledge workers and call center applications, the MMR-based thin clients look pretty good for Education and YouTube-happy C-level employees looking to catch-up on their Hulu…

I managed to catch the Xsigo boys as the night wound down and they insured my that “mom’s cooking” back at the HQ. “Very soon” we should be hearing about a Xsigo I/O Director option that is a better fit for ROBO and SME deployments. The best part about Xsigo’s I/O virtualization technology in VMware applications: it delivers without a proprietary blade or server requirement! I’m really looking forward to getting some Xsigo into the SOLORI lab this summer…

h1

VMware View 4, Certified HCL Tripples in Size

January 26, 2010

In the past month, the number of hardware Thin and Zero clients certified for VMware View 4.0 has nearly trippled. It only seemed fitting to update our list to further showcase the current state of the View “certified” HCL for “hardware” thin clients. The “ThreadX” OS variants include hardware from Teradici (TC1100) to accelerate the PCoIP protocol. 

As of January 26, 2010, the following hardware clients (average price of $526/unit) are “officially” on VMware’s HCL:

OEM Model OS Supports Unit Cost New Since 
    Variant PcoIP (Est. $) Dec-09
Amulet Hotkey DXR4-iP ThreadX Y
(quad-head video)
TBD Y
Astec Technology Co. A3520 Linux Embedded for Thin Client b1106 Y TBD Y
Astec Technology Co. A3580 Windows XPe SP2 Y TBD Y
ClearCube C7420 ThreadX Y $1,160 Y
ClearCube I9420 ThreadX Y TBD Y
DELL OptiPlex FX160 Windows XPe SP2 Y $512 N
DevonIT TC10 ThreadX Y $342 Y
DevonIT TC5 Windows Embedded Standard 2009 Y $299 N
HP GT7720 Windows Embedded Standard Y $799 N
HP t5545 HP ThinPro Y $296 Y
HP t5630 Windows XPe SP3 Y $632 N
HP t5630W Windows Embedded Standard Y $440 N
HP t5720 Windows XPe SP3 Y $410 (refurbished) N
HP t5730 Windows XPe SP3 Y $349 N
HP t5730W Windows Embedded Standard Y $550 N
HP t5740 Windows Embedded Standard Y $429 N
HP vc4820t Windows Embedded Standard Y N/A Y
IGEL UD2-420 ES Windows Embedded Standard N $436 Y
IGEL UD2-420 LX IGEL Linux 4.02.500 N $292 Y
IGEL UD3-420 ES Windows Embedded Standard Y $561 Y
IGEL UD3-420 LX IGEL Linux 4.02.500 Y $412 Y
IGEL UD3-720 ES Windows Embedded Standard Y $561 Y
IGEL UD3-720 LX IGEL Linux 4.02.500 Y $436 Y
IGEL UD5-420 ES Windows Embedded Standard Y $627 Y
IGEL UD5-420 LX IGEL Linux 4.02.500 Y $579 Y
IGEL UD5-720 ES Windows Embedded Standard Y $653 Y
IGEL UD5-720 LX IGEL Linux 4.02.500 Y $605 Y
IGEL UD7-720 ES Windows Embedded Standard Y $1,042 Y
IGEL UD7-720 LX IGEL Linux 4.02.500 Y $925 Y
IGEL UD9-720 ES Windows Embedded Standard Y $953 Y
Leadtek Research Inc. WinFast VP200 P ThreadX Y $715 Y
Praim XP-6700 Windows XPe SP3 Y TBD Y
Praim XP940-I Windows XPe SP3 N TBD Y
Praim XP9400-U Windows XPe SP3 Y TBD Y
Praim XT900-I ThinOX 8.01.14 N TBD Y
Samsung SyncMaster NC190 ThreadX Y $467 Y
Samsung SyncMaster NC240 ThreadX Y $524 Y
Wyse C90LEW Windows Embedded Standard 2009 Y $498 N
Wyse P20 ThreadX Y $585 Y
Wyse R50L SUSE Linux Enterprise TC 10 Y $481 Y
Wyse R50LE SUSE Linux Enterprise TC 10 Y $442 Y
Wyse R90LEW Windows Embedded Standard 2009 Y $640 N
Wyse R90LW Windows Embedded Standard 2009 Y $593 N
Wyse S10 WTOS 6.5 N $252 N
Wyse V10L WTOS 6.5 N $315 N
Wyse V10L Dual DVI WTOS 6.5 N $447 N
Wyse X50L SUSE Linux Enterprise TC 10 Y $671 Y

 SOLORI’s NOTE: The Samsung NC190 and NC240 include integrated 19″ and 24″ monitors, respectively. This combination makes them the most cost and energy efficient PCoIP solutions on the market. If all-in-one products meet your deployment profile, the Samsung units are worth a serious look.

Devices not on this list may “work” with VMware View 4.0 but may not support all of View 4’s features. VMware addresses certified and compatible as follows:

Certified and Compatible Thin Clients:
Certified – A thin client device listed against a particular VMware View release in the Certified For column has been tested by the thin client manufacturer against that specific VMware View release and includes a minimum set of features supported in that VMware View version.

Compatible – A thin client device certified against a specific VMware View release is compatible with previous and subsequent VMware View releases according to the compatibility guarantees published as part of that specific VMware View release (typically two major releases in both directions). However, a compatible thin client may not include all of the features of the newer VMware View release. Please refer to your VMware View Client documentation to determine which features are included.

Unlisted thin clients may embed VMware’s “software client” along with a more general purpose operating system to deliver View 4 compatibility. Support for this class of device may be restricted to the device vendor only. Likewise, thin clients that are compatible with earlier versions of View may support only a subset of View 4’s features. When in doubt, contact the thin client manufacturer before deploying with View 4.

h1

VMware View 4, Current Certified HCL

November 30, 2009

Given the recent release of VMware View 4.0, we though it would be handy to showcase the current state of the View “certified” HCL for “hardware” thin clients. As of November 30, 2009, the following hardware thin clients are “officially” on VMware’s HCL:

OEM Model OS
Variant
Certified
For
Compatible
With
Supports
PcoIP
Unit Cost
(Est. $)
DELL OptiPlex FX160 Windows XPe SP2 View 4.0 View 3.1, View 3.0, VDM 2.1, VDM 2.0 Y $512
DevonIT TC5 Windows Embedded Standard 2009 View 4.0, View 3.1 View 3.0, VDM 2.1, VDM 2.0 Y $299
HP GT7720 Windows Embedded Standard View 4.0 View 3.1, View 3.0, VDM 2.1, VDM 2.0 Y $799
HP t5630 Windows XPe SP3 View 4.0, View 3.1 View 3.0, VDM 2.1, VDM 2.0 Y $632
HP t5630W Windows Embedded Standard View 4.0 View 3.1, View 3.0, VDM 2.1, VDM 2.0 Y $440
HP t5720 Windows XPe SP3 View 4.0, View 3.1 View 3.0, VDM 2.1, VDM 2.0 Y $410 (refurbished)
HP t5730 Windows XPe SP3 View 4.0, View 3.1 View 3.0, VDM 2.1, VDM 2.0 Y $349
HP t5730W Windows Embedded Standard View 4.0 View 3.1, View 3.0, VDM 2.1, VDM 2.0 Y $550
HP t5740 Windows Embedded Standard View 4.0 View 3.1, View 3.0, VDM 2.1, VDM 2.0 Y $429
HP vc4820t Windows Embedded Standard View 4.0 View 3.1, View 3.0, VDM 2.1, VDM 2.0 Y N/A
Wyse C90LEW Windows Embedded Standard 2009 View 4.0 View 3.1, View 3.0, VDM 2.1, VDM 2.0 Y $498
Wyse R90LEW Windows Embedded Standard 2009 View 4.0 View 3.1, View 3.0, VDM 2.1, VDM 2.0 Y $640
Wyse R90LW Windows Embedded Standard 2009 View 4.0 View 3.1, View 3.0, VDM 2.1, VDM 2.0 Y $593
Wyse S10 WTOS 6.5 View 4.0 View 3.1, View 3.0, VDM 2.1, VDM 2.0 N $252
Wyse V10L WTOS 6.5 View 4.0 View 3.1, View 3.0, VDM 2.1, VDM 2.0 N $315
Wyse V10L Dual DVI WTOS 6.5 View 4.0 View 3.1, View 3.0, VDM 2.1, VDM 2.0 N $447

Devices not on this list may “work” with VMware View 4.0 but may not support all of View 4’s features. VMware addresses certified and compatible as follows:

Certified and Compatible Thin Clients:
Certified – A thin client device listed against a particular VMware View release in the Certified For column has been tested by the thin client manufacturer against that specific VMware View release and includes a minimum set of features supported in that VMware View version.

Compatible – A thin client device certified against a specific VMware View release is compatible with previous and subsequent VMware View releases according to the compatibility guarantees published as part of that specific VMware View release (typically two major releases in both directions). However, a compatible thin client may not include all of the features of the newer VMware View release. Please refer to your VMware View Client documentation to determine which features are included.

Unlisted thin clients may embed VMware’s “software client” along with a more general purpose operating system to deliver View 4 compatibility. Support for this class of device may be restricted to the device vendor only. Likewise, thin clients that are compatible with earlier versions of View may support only a subset of View 4’s features. When in doubt, contact the thin client manufacturer before deploying with View 4.

Updated: 1-December-2009 –  added price reference for listed thin clients.

h1

Quick-Take: VMworld 2009 Wrap-Up

September 8, 2009

VMworld 2009 in San Franciso started off with a crash and a fist fight, but ended without further incident. If you’re looking for what happened, it would be hard to beat Duncan Epping’s link-summary of the San Francisco VMworld 2009 at Yellow-Bricks, so we won’t even try. Likewise, Chad Sakacc has some great EMC view point on his Virtualgeek blog, and – fresh from his new book releaseScott Lowe has some great detail about the VMworld keynotes, events and sessions he attended.

There is a great no-spin commentary on VMworld’s “softer underbelly” on Jon William Toigo’s Drunken Data blog – especially the post about Xsigo’s participation in VMworld 2009. Also, Brian Madden has a great wrap-up video of of interviews from the VMworld floor including VMware’s Client Virtualization Platform (CVP) and the software implementation of Teradici’s PC-over-IP.

AMD’s IOMMU was on display using a test mule with two 12-core 6100 processors and a SR5690 chipset. The targets were a FirePro graphics card and a Solarflare 10GE NIC. For IOMMU-based virtualization to have broad appeal, hardware device segmentation must be supported in a manner compatible with vMotion (live migration.) No segmentation was hinted at in AMD’s demo (for FirePro), but the fact that vSphere+IOMMU+Magny-Cours equated to enough stability to be openly demonstrating the technology says a lot about the maturity of AMD’s upcoming chips and chipsets. On the other hand, Solarflare’s demonstration previewed – in 10GE – what could be possible in a future version of IOV for GPU’s:

“The flexible vNIC demonstration will highlight the Solarstorm server adapter’s scalable, virtualized architecture, supporting 100s of virtual machines and 1000s of vNICs. The Solarstorm vNIC architecture provides flexible mapping of vNICs, so that each guest OS can have its own vNIC, as well as traffic management, enabling prioritization and isolation of IP flows between vNICs.”

– Solarflare Press Release

SOLORI’s Take: The controversy surrounding VMware’s “focus” on the VMware “sphere” of products was a non-starter. The name VMworld does not stand for “Virtualization World” – it stands for “VMware World” and denying competitor’s “marketing access” to that venue seems like a reasonable restriction. While it may seem like a strong-arm tactic to some, insisting that vendors/partners are there “for VMworld only” – and hence restricting cross-marketing efforts in and around the venue – makes it more difficult for direct competitors to play the “NASCAR-style marketing” (as Toigo calls it) game.

VMworld is a showcase for technologies driving the virtualization eco-system as seen from VMware’s perspective. While there are a growing number of competitors for virtualization mind-share, VMware’s pace and vision – to date – has been driven by careful observation of use-case more so than innovation for innovation’s sake. It is this attention to business need that has made VMware successful and what defines VMworld’s focus – and it is in that light that VMworld 2009 looks like a great success.