Subscribe to our blogs!

Your email:

Follow Us

Current Articles | RSS Feed RSS Feed

Persistent vs. Non-Persistent: Let the Customer Decide!

 

It is my belief that the customer will ultimately decide whether to implement a non- persistent or persistent virtual desktop solution. About a month ago I had the privilege of interviewing two very intelligent gentlemen in the VDI industry, Tal Klein, Senior Director of Products at Bromium and Guise Bule, CEO of tuCloud. In my conversation with Klein he compared VDI to penicillin. He explained that back in the day penicillin was looked at as a “cure all” solution for every disease, and how VDI is viewed in a similar way, as a “cure all” for IT problems. He agrees with most industry experts that for some use cases VDI is a viable solution, but for others it is not. I like Tal because he is not afraid to start a debate with others, and he did not hold anything back when I interviewed him on Desktop Cloud Live. This conversation with Tal was the impetus for another conversation which I would like to focus on for the remainder of this blog.

IS NON-PERSISTENT THE WAY OF THE FUTURE?

Bule talked about how non-persistent desktops are the way of the future. I was thoroughly impressed by his arguments. He reminds me of a warrior, fighting valiantly for the adoption of this technology. No doubt, he is a big believer in non-persistent deployments. Holy smokes, was he ever! See for yourself, he talked about it for about an hour on Desktop Cloud Live. And yes, his arguments are legit.

After hearing Bule’s arguments, I was torn whether non-persistent or persistent was the way of the future. After hearing what Guise had to say and after conducting research, I was drawn to the idea that a non-persistent desktop disguised as a persistent could be the best way forward. His arguments were convincing and I could tell that he had been around the VDI block once or twice.

PARADIGM SHIFT: “LET THE END USER DECIDE”

Persistent vs. Non-PersistentThe thing is, both arguments for and against persistent vs. non-persistent are valid. My paradigm shifted from a “one is right” point of view to a, “both might be right” after reading Peter Bookman's blog titled “Why do people believe that non-persistent virtual desktops are the future of Desktop Cloud Computing? I do not!”.   In his blog he gives both examples of persistent and non-persistent, and in both cases the customer was satisfied. Bookman agrees that giving the customer the freedom of choice is much better than forcing a decision upon them. 

To me, virtual desktops are about freedom. Freedom to compute how you want, when you want, and from wherever you want. I believe that the ultimate dream of VDI should not be determined on persistent vs. non-persistent. Simply said it should be determined on, “Letting the customer decide!”

Giving people the option to choose A or B just makes sense. If customers are educated, they will know what is best for them. I ask myself, if I had the choice between non-persistent vs. persistent which one would I choose? To be honest, I would choose whatever best fits my needs, and I almost guarantee that customers would say the exact same thing! So I say let's educate the customers and give them the liberty to decide which solution is best for them.

MY DREAM OF VIRTUAL DESKTOPS

Now that I have expressed my opinion, allow me to share my dream of virtual desktops and how I believe they will be used. In the future you will see users simply subscribe to a desktop month-to-month and have access to it from any device around the world. I see a world where computing power is shared with everyone. It will be a world of ultimate computing freedom allowing users to have the applications they want without having to invest in expensive hardware. Isn’t that what thin clients are all about? Basic and cost effective computers that connect to a better desktop hosted in the cloud?

I would love to see the day when I can travel to third world countries and give those people the power to compute on a virtual desktop that can run programs like After Effects, Illustrator, Maya, and Premiere. They wouldn’t have to worry about having a beefy end point, or having to download the latest plug-ins because it would be delivered right to them. Think of the incredible creations these people would be able to produce. Think of the education that we could share with one another. Think of the computing freedom that they would enjoy. The possibilities are endless and we are not that far off. So I will say it again, and say it very strongly, freedom to decide is the way of the future.

Comments

One of the only ways that I see "the end-user deciding" is that if IT actually takes the time to build a proper Service Catalog with proper definitions of what persistent and non-persistent desktops mean along with maybe an KB article on the pros and cons of each. The typical end-user isn't educated enough to make that determination, unless you are thinking that "end-user" means IT staff. This starts with proper Service Strategy, Service Design, and Operations. I wrote an article about this a couple of years ago and it is critical to the success of your statement in my opinion. http://siliconangle.com/blog/2011/03/17/itsm-4-vdi-some-initial-thoughts/
Posted @ Friday, June 01, 2012 8:30 AM by Michael Keen
Hi Michael,  
By end user I was meaning IT staff. I agree that in most cases the typical end user does not have enough knowledge to decide if they want persistent or non-persistent, but the IT staff, yes, they should know the difference and be able to make decisions for themselves. If that means that there should to be more publications and studies on the difference between non-persistent and persistent, I think that needs to be produced.  
 
The ultimate goal is to have a virtual desktop that outperforms a physical in every way, that is the future, and that is the only way it will be widely adopted, and that might be a different desktop in a case by case scenario. Some customers might need non-persistent while others need persistent. I say educate customers on both and let them decide. It's like if I buy a new pair of powder skis (by BD of course), I don't want the sales rep to tell me where and when I can ride them, I will do what I want with them, and I will tear it anywhere I go, park, crud, or powder. The same analogy goes with cars, computers, and of course virtual desktop infrastructures. If customers have knowledge, they have freedom. 
 
Freedom to do what you want with your virtual desktops is defiantly the way to go.
Posted @ Friday, June 01, 2012 10:47 AM by Dan Noakes
I agree with the author of the article in that is crucial to allow the end user (IT) to decide whether persistent or non-persistent works best for them in which situation, i.e., for which user or user population. Having the "freedom of choice" as he pointed out is the model of success. We all thrive on flexibility. Obviously the author is strongly opinionated when it comes to VDI deployment and powder skis though we'll leave the later for another day!
Posted @ Friday, June 01, 2012 2:43 PM by Craig Sturm
@Craig Hahaha. Your last statement made me laugh. Next winter you will have to come out to go skiing with us. You will love it, it's always a party.
Posted @ Friday, June 01, 2012 2:56 PM by Dan Noakes
if this is an architecture question, then yes IT should be deciding whether or not to deliver persistent or non-persistent desktops. That decision should be based on solid intelligence gathered about the end user compute environment with tools like Lakeside Software's SysTrack <insert favorite analysis tool here>. Once you have modeled the future state architecture then which mode makes the most sense for the business-side user or better put IT's CUSTOMER should be delivered. The virtual desktop service should also be planned and built properly to ensure that SLAs are met and that there is continuous improvement steps. VDI is much more than hardware and persistent or non-persistent, don't lose sight of that very important fact.
Posted @ Friday, June 01, 2012 3:29 PM by Michael Keen
Great questions and insight so far. My question is why IT is considered the end user. Regarding knowledge workers, they choose their equipment today generally perhaps from a suite offered by IT, but they are considered knowledgeable enough to choose the best tools for what they do. Why should desktop clouds be any different including persistent or non-persistent? When IT offers or doesn't via BYOD or some other method only pieces of the total solution, why not have the end user select what works best for their use case?
Posted @ Friday, June 01, 2012 9:42 PM by Peter Bookman
Post Comment
Name
 *
Email
 *
Website (optional)
Comment
 *

Allowed tags: <a> link, <b> bold, <i> italics