The aim of this article is to discuss the challenges that currently block the VDI solutions to be widely accepted. The content is based on the following assumptions:
- The reader is aware of the basic differences between the Terminal Server architecture and the VDI architecture.
- The content does not discuss the individual components of either of the architectures.
- The reader can appreciate the unique manner in which SUNDE offers a better solution when compared to the other vendors in VDI.
If the discussion had happened a decade ago, the popular way to get connected to a remote computer used to be through Terminal Services. It was an indigenous way to exhaust most of the complex computing on the remote desktop server with the minimal or no computing at the client end. No doubt, it was an incredible innovation in the world of computers with extremely reduced cost and simplified maintenance at the user’s front. However, the Terminal Servers suffered some major issues of the time:
- Many applications were incompatible to be used in a shared server environment. An equal number of applications were difficult to be accessed remotely.
- The Terminal Services offered much inferior user experience for the graphics or multimedia rich files. A few companies tried to solve that with their specific Remote Display Protocols, but the generated output was far less streamlined than that in a PC.
- The personalization was another major setback. With multiple users connected to a single shared server, the user isolation seldom posed the security threats, and the desktop could not be personalized individually.
The solution to these issues was brought forth as a great revolution in the form of Virtual Desktops. This Virtual Desktop Infrastructure (VDI) is not only a cost effective way in the long run; it is capable of multiple users computing with ample security. Unfortunately, most of the users of Terminal Services hesitate to switch over to the VDI solution due to the following main factors:
- The upfront costs involved are comparable to the individual PCs, while Terminal Servers offer a cheaper option. This is because the VDI architecture implies the immensely efficient servers, which provide the option of server-less endpoint device to the users. This increases the maintenance costs as well as the architectural expenditures at the server end.
A point worth noting here is that while the expense on the server is heavy, the client side expenditures are minimal. Especially in case of Zero clients, no costs are incurred on server, CPU or hardware, making it the perfect choice in anyone’s budget.
- There are multiple licenses to be purchased with VDI:
- The software license which is same as that bought with a PC.
- The MS OS license for using it on the virtual machine.
- The VDA license for the endpoint device to get connected to the server’s virtual desktop.
- The complex architecture of the VDI solution keeps the beginners a step away. They find the server deployment difficult, which requires them to seek for additional technical assistance.
This has limited the VDI implementation only to the bigger enterprises, who can afford to spend a major part of the funds, while saving that on the output over the time. The need of the hour is to have a cost effective and a simpler choice which can be used by the majority of small scale industries and the rest of the society.
Fortunately, SUNDE’s VDI solution proved to be a great option for an advanced and well researched framework. Not only the customer saves a lot on the deployment costs, the company excels in the products which are different and innovative with the most advanced features:
- SUNDE’s Dana Zero Client comes as a package with all the necessary components, which requires one to pay only for the endpoint device. The rest of the components come FREE!!
- SUNDE’s innovative VDI Protocol performed much smoother and better for the multimedia data transfer than the other vendors.
- Installation and management is extremely easy, and the components pose no incompatibility issues.