Virtually Speaking

Dan Kusnetzky, Paula Rooney and Ken Hess

Desktop virtualization according to Virtual Computer

By | December 30, 2008, 3:00am PST

Summary: Alex Vasilevsky, CTO of Virtual Computer, posted a tweet proclaiming that a milestone in the development of NxTop the other day (see The Launch of Virtual Computer, Inc. for more information). Since I’ve known Alex for quite a number of years, I just had to know what he was doing. So, I tweeted back and [...]

Alex Vasilevsky, CTO of Virtual Computer, posted a tweet proclaiming that a milestone in the development of NxTop the other day (see The Launch of Virtual Computer, Inc. for more information). Since I’ve known Alex for quite a number of years, I just had to know what he was doing. So, I tweeted back and asked to have a chat. We exchanged a few messages to confirm a time that would work for both of us. When the call finally occured, I had the pleasure of speaking both with Alex and one of Alex’s colleagues, Doug Lane, Virtual Computer’s Director of Product Management and Marketing.

Virtual Computer’s NxTop is now in beta testing and appears to be living up to its early promise. NxTop is intended to allow industry standard desktop or laptop systems to become a virtual environment.

NxTop Engine

NxTop makes it possible deploy a very small hypervisor and client management system, the NxTop Engine, on the physical hardware and then deploy workloads (an operating system, a series of applications, user data and user personalization data) as virtual machines. Although this might sound similar to work being done by VMware, Citrix and Neocleus, the key difference is the management system, NxTop Center, Virtual Computer has developed.

NxTop Center

NxTop Center is a management environment and repository that allows an organization to store operating systems, applications, user data and user personalization data separately. So, an organization only needs to maitain a single copy of operating systems and applications. When a PC is being provisioned, the appropriate operating system, applications, user data and personization data is selected from the repository and a virtual machine is created. This virtual machine is then deployed on the user’s system. A user’s PC can be provisioned with as many virtual machines as needed to help that person be productive.

Change made easy

If the operating system or one of the applications needs to be updated or changed, the IT administrator updates the master copy. Each of the users’ systems would notice the change and would update themselves when convenient for the user.

Snapshot Analysis

After organizations have consolidated virtual servers to reduce the number of physical systems deployed in their datacenter, the next obvious place to look for improvements is the organization’s client systems. There are several approaches to this that I’ve posted on in the past.

Some of these approaches are:

  • consolidating all of the applications on local PC blades, blade servers or general purpose servers and then allow users to access their workloads using virtual access software
  • consolidating some applications on servers by encapsulating them using virtual application software and then delivering those applications to a client system when needed
  • encapsulating workloads into virtual client systems using virtual machine software and then running them locally, running them on local PC blades, running them on blade servers in the datacenter or running them on a large general purpose system in the datacenter. The final three of these also require the use of virtual access software.

Virtual Computer’s NxTop clearly falls into the last category. Unlike some competitors that focus on the hypervisor and just assume a management system exists that would help the IT administrators manage the encapsulated worklads, Virtual Computer started with the management system and then built a small hypervisor/client management tool.

This approach appears likely to result in a very well managed, optimal environment.

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily e-mail newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

More from “Virtually Speaking”

Daniel Kusnetzky is a distinguished analyst and the founder of the Kusnetzky Group LLC.

Disclosure

Dan Kusnetzky

The Kusnetzky Group LLC is an independent technology industry research firm that focuses on system software, virtualization and cloud computing technology.

Dan's opinions are based upon research, personal experiences and actual use of technology. They are not based upon the relationships the company may or may not have with suppliers, end user organizations, the media, consultants or other analysts.

Dan's research is available on a subscription basis through the Kusnetzky Group LLC. Dan's attendance at industry events or at client meetings may be sponsored by the client. Clients may provide hardware or software for testing prior to the publication of analysis that includes that product. Clients may also provide shirts, jackets, coffee cups, folders, backpacks, pens and other event chotchkies. While nice, these don't effect Dan's opinions or insight about those clients or their products.

Biography

Dan Kusnetzky

Daniel Kusnetzky, Analyst and Founder of Kusnetzky Group LLC, is responsible for research, publications, and operations. Mr. Kusnetzky has been involved with information technology since the late 1970s. Mr. Kusnetzky has been responsible for research operations at the 451 Group; corporate and marketing strategy for Open-Xchange; system software and virtualization research at IDC; and program and product management at Digital Equipment Corporation.; Today, Mr. Kusnetzky focuses on system software, virtualization technology and cloud computing.

20
Comments

Join the conversation!

Just In

Contributr
Thanks for wading in
dkusnetzky 1st Jan 2009
Doug,

Thanks for clarifying your position!

Dan K
0 Votes
+ -
One Question - Why?
Roger Ramjet 30th Dec 2008
Just because you CAN do it, doesn't mean you SHOULD. Virtualization barely makes sense in the datacenter (only for poorly performing OSes like Windoze that cannot run more than one or two server programs at a time), so why would you bring it to the desktop?

I've seen many schemes to do this desktop stuff before. Ghosting OSes and elaborate network transfer schemes have been proposed in the past - with the same predictable result. The complexity was ALWAYS greater than the "experts" said, and they quietly died. It comes down to this - too many "moving" parts on the client side increases administration costs.

A nice UNIX NFS automounting solution allows you to add/change/update applications on the server - and all the clients instantly have access - WITHOUT any changes on the client. All user data is saved via NFS to a file server, so once again there is no need to alter the client. All you have left is the client OS - which should be as generic as possible. This leaves you with 2 system administration task options on every client: 1. Reboot if something isn't working (although a good UNIX sysadmin can fix things remotely without resorting to a reboot), or 2) Reinstall if everything if FUBAR (takes less than 1 hour).

It's hard to imagine anything simpler than that. Every client is generic and can be swapped in and out when needed. All Application data is stored on a server as well as the user data (on another server). If you add some filesystem caching, you can even survive a network outage!

Good luck on the Virtualization stuff! In the IT world, there is always room for another second best solution . . .
0 Votes
+ -
you could combine the two approaches
hamobu-22333136139518773481685514128812 Updated - 30th Dec 2008
You application server and user data server could be virtual from Amazon, or Sun. Save a room and some electricity.
0 Votes
+ -
Or not
Roger Ramjet 30th Dec 2008
My approach is to use Distributed computing - which is to have all the computers at people's desks (and in the server room) work together. You can create a grid (like a cloud) with the computers in the company - why pay someone else to do it? Educating users not to reboot their (UNIX) machines - lest a grid job could be killed, would be the toughest challenge.
0 Votes
+ -
Pesky reality gets in the way of your aproach
hamobu-22333136139518773481685514128812 31st Dec 2008
Do you think that your average company staffed with A+ and MCSE certified highschool graduates will do what you are sugesting?
0 Votes
+ -
How do you break a bad habit?
Roger Ramjet 31st Dec 2008
I suppose the punishment must be great enough to discourage dissent. I like the punching glove popping out of the monitor, myself wink
0 Votes
+ -
Your post is extremely confused.
B.O.F.H. 30th Dec 2008
Do you have any idea about what you are talking about? I have my doubts (based upon posts on other technical subjects). Please elaborate with some actual experience on data centers, virtualization and how this works (or fails) as per desktops. Ghosting is just passing an image (you can do this with PXE) and not related to virtualization or better CPU and resource utilization.
0 Votes
+ -
Take a look for yourself
Roger Ramjet 30th Dec 2008
Since I repeated myself many times, why not just get it from the source? http://autonomics.blogspot.com.

I'm not talking about Virtualization techniques - I'm arguing that the whole idea is daft.

I did purchase a VMware 1.0 license - so how long have I been doing this?
0 Votes
+ -
Contributr
Consider the forum please
dkusnetzky 31st Dec 2008
This forum is not meant to provide in-depth technical detail. It is meant as an overview of what's happening in the market. That being said, virtualization is a broad topic that includes placing many different types of functions into a logical/virtual environment. The goals for each type of virtualization technology are different. Isolating a function to improve levels of manageability or security is one common theme. Increasing performance, agility or scalability are also commonly mentioned.

Another point I must make is that Kusnetzky Group offers advisory services to its clients. More technical detail is presented in these engagements than would ever be found here.

Dan K
0 Votes
+ -
Big Fish
Roger Ramjet 31st Dec 2008
It's nice that there are so many clueless idiots out there that buy this Virtualization crap hook, line, and sinker. You are just taking advantage of that fact with your (paid) advisory services. It's a good business model - I believe it was P.T. Barnum's model also.

The ONLY reason companies are implementing Virtualization/Consolidation is because the server room looks ugly with many different servers from different vendors and eras. CIO's parading VIPs around their data center feel better when everything is color coordinated.
  • Flagged
0 Votes
+ -
Sun Rays
Burana 30th Dec 2008
...and if you use Sun Rays you don't even have to install a client OS, because everything is on the server.
0 Votes
+ -
Contributr
Yes but...
dkusnetzky 31st Dec 2008
This is a wonderful approach if the applications an organization wants to use are supported on Sun's hardware AND Sun is a preferred vendor in the organization's environment.

It is not always a viable choice.

Thanks for bringing up the topic!

Dan K
0 Votes
+ -
Darn windows makes these solutions imposible.
hamobu-22333136139518773481685514128812 31st Dec 2008
You can do so much more on a Unix and Linux platform than you can with windows when it comes to server/client type solutions. Unfortunately everyone uses windows. The problems of this sort with windows come from two sources:

1. Windows and apps developed for windows are developed with mindset of single user working with admin privileges on a single dedicated PC.
2. Licensing of proprietary apps makes it difficult to implement any solution where more than one user is using an app per installation. Even if company pays for some sort of bulk licensing, MS Office for example is still treated as one copy on one PC purchased in store.
0 Votes
+ -
No need for server hardware.
hamobu-22333136139518773481685514128812 Updated - 30th Dec 2008
You can use Amazon's EC2 to create virtual instances of servers (or desktops). Save a room and some electricity.
0 Votes
+ -
We don't need no stinkin clouds
Roger Ramjet 30th Dec 2008
That room and electricity (and servers) are still used - by Amazon, no savings there. All it costs is control. Control over your data's privacy. Control over SLAs. Control over costs . . .
0 Votes
+ -
Amazon has Economy of scale and comparative advantage
hamobu-22333136139518773481685514128812 31st Dec 2008
Amazon can achieve saving and efficiencies with servers that insurance company I work for cannot. Further more, there is great deal of task and resource overlap that can be eliminated by companies using Amazon cloud rather than their own servers.

Consider that ten companies could use one slightly more powerfull server at amazon instead of each of them buying a server for themselves, hiring an admin to maintain it, and have it sit idle and under-utilized much of the time.
0 Votes
+ -
Great, but
Roger Ramjet 31st Dec 2008
There are serious downsides to giving up "control". What if Amazon's data center (with your data) was located in Detroit during the big blackout of 03 (I lived through it - on the 15th floor . . .)? There was absolutely no way for you to access your data - period, for over a week. What if terrorists blow up the hydro dam next to the Google data center? Less likely, but not a zero percent chance either.

Cloud SLAs cannot be guaranteed. If you have your own datacenter, you at least have access to your data during emergencies (a nice big generator or two will help).

What happens when your internet connection "gets slow"? Tracking that down takes time and effort and meanwhile you are missing your own SLAs to your customers.

How about tracking down very difficult problems? We once had a CPU (PA-RISC actually), that would "flip a bit" every once in awhile. I've seen disk controllers that do this bit flipping stuff too. It was hard enough to track down with your own IT staff + vendors + customers. Just how hard would it be when you have to convince someone on the other end of the phone to devote that kind of resources to it. Let's just call this the "Silent Corruption" problem.

I would say that non-mission critical stuff could migrate to the cloud - but critical paths should always run though the local data center.
0 Votes
+ -
Video killed the redio star
ronald.vermine 31st Dec 2008
Why do we need another management system?
Didn't we have enough? Why do we need hypervisor for management the Windows environment?

So I put an hypervisor (Which is the right approach for clients), but then, I add another virtualization layer, inside the Windows OS to enable management capabilities and another management system to IT and all that going to reduce the TCO? Some how... It doesn't make sense for me

We are familiar with the promise: the next system will solve the problem of the legacy one?.
0 Votes
+ -
Virtual Computer's Perspective
Doug Lane Updated - 31st Dec 2008
As a member of the team at Virtual Computer, it has been interesting to read through the comments. Some follow-up thoughts and points of clarification:

- We are not running a virtualization layer inside of or on top of Windows. We are running a bare metal client hypervisor on the PC hardware that runs the end-user OS as a virtual machine and a separate, very small virtual machine (not Windows, not visible to the end-user) that performs the management functions based on instructions from the management server. This provides countless advantages over management agents in Windows, first among them the ability to survive and recover from a major failure of Windows itself such as blue screen of death.

- We complement the cloud. We see our product interoperating with the cloud for things like virtual machine and user data backup (e.g., Amazon S3 or similar) or even data disaster recovery desktop access (Amazon EC2 or similar) in the event of PC failure of loss/theft).

- We don?t depend on the cloud. Even though we can leverage the cloud when it makes sense, the virtual machine executes locally on the PC, so a catastrophic failure of a cloud service provider does not take users down.

- If you believe Windows is not the future, we can help as much as ever. Our view is that Windows isn?t going anywhere, but if you do have designs on rolling out alternative desktop operating systems such Linux or other Unix flavors, we can deliver these as virtual machines that run stand-alone or concurrently along-side Windows with full isolation. When you have fully migrated core user activities to Linux equivalents, simply unassign the Windows virtual machine on the management server and it disappears from the user?s machine. Isn?t that much more practical than trying to sell your organizing on a ?cold turkey? migration from Windows?
0 Votes
+ -
I've run VMware since I bought a 1.0 license. Before that I was a wiz with emulators such as SoftWindows, SoftPC, WABI, etc. I have experience with IBM LPARS and some HP and Sun virt. also. That gives me a background upon which to speak.

I understand the "value" of VMs when it comes to poorly-written OSes that have trouble multi-tasking. I've seen the proliferation of cheap x86 boxes. I understand why you would cater to the Windoze crowd.

UNIX (which includes Linux) does not have any need for a limiting stranglehold such as VM. You should read my (long winded) "discussion" about how VMs are inappropriate for UNIX (on my blog: http://autonomics.blogspot.com). VMs are unneeded complexity that holds us back from achieving autonomics.

[Isn?t that much more practical than trying to sell your organizing on a ?cold turkey? migration from Windows?]

The truth will always win in the end. The truth is that Windoze is a poorly written OS (but getting better). The truth is that UNIX has rock-solid performance, but large corporations forked it for their own advantage - effectively hobbling UNIX while Windoze pulled ahead.

In order for a corporate to gain an IT ADVANTAGE, you must have different methods, equipment and personnel than your competitors (and they must be better). Following the crowd never gives you that advantage - and I say Windoze does not give you an advantage. The ONLY way to convince someone to go "cold turkey" is to show how to reach that advantage. Very few people are qualified to show this (nerds can DO this ...), and there MUST be open minds on the corporate side. My bet is still on the turtle . . .

As for "messing with" the client - just leave it alone! A fully autonomic UNIX client that can be cloned (physically) at everyone's desk is the most efficient architecture for computing. Anyone can log into any computer with just a password. The clients can all be placed in a Grid architecture to run compute-intensive jobs (Ford used NASTRAN for FEA) - eliminating the need for large compute servers (like Crays, etc.). Take a look at BOINC to see how effective client computing is.

If you need a larger server for a database, go ahead and get it! The same OS load runs on the server that runs on the client. In this way you can truly only buy what you need.

Thin clients (like DumbRays) have NO ability to pool their processing ala Grid, and require quite an expensive server investment to make them work.

All I need to do to make this happen is: Go to an existing site with PCs. Install the OS. Run a single script to make it all happen (called the magic script). So how "cold turkey" is that?
0 Votes
+ -
Contributr
Thanks for wading in
dkusnetzky 1st Jan 2009
Doug,

Thanks for clarifying your position!

Dan K

Join the conversation!

Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]
ie8 fix

The best of ZDNet, delivered

ZDNet Newsletters

Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox

Facebook Activity

White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources
ie8 fix