Going Green with Virtual Desktops

Everyone is talking about Green IT these days, and virtualization is a popular way to save money and reduce your environmental impact at the same time. Many companies have already discovered the benefits of virtualizing their servers, so the natural progression is to begin looking at virtualizing their desktops, as well.

There are several environmental benefits to using virtual desktops, but it all depends on the type of approach—whether you’re using server-based (VDI) or client-based virtual desktops. In the past, we have blogged about the shortcomings of VDI, such as cost and lack of offline support. From a Green angle, the problem with VDI is the huge datacenter infrastructure it requires, and more servers mean more space, increased power consumption, and increased cooling costs. The additional servers required by VDI more than offset any green savings you might see, and as a result, VDI is actually less Earth-friendly than traditional desktops. In contrast, a client-based solution (like MokaFive) requires no additional datacenter infrastructure.

Let’s compare the green impact of MokaFive vs. VDI. Gartner predicts that 49 million endpoints will be virtualized by 2013. Let's assume 30% will be laptops and remaining will be desktops. Based on those assumptions if all of those desktops were virtualized using MokaFive (instead of VDI), we would prevent 7.8 million metric tons of CO2 emissions each year—that’s the equivalent of taking 1.4 million cars off the road per year!

Another environmental benefit of client-based virtual desktops is the need for fewer machines. Virtualization allows you to use existing machines for multiple purposes: for example, an employee can use the same laptop for home and work. As a result, you can avoid the carbon footprint of an additional machine, including the energy and cooling it requires.

In addition, telecommuting is growing in popularity, and virtual desktops are helping to drive that trend. With centralized management, IT can easily support remote workers’ desktops, and employees have the flexibility of accessing their corporate desktop anytime, from any machine. Remote workers are environmentally friendly, too: they take cars off the road, and they save on office emissions (consider the space, energy, and cooling that each cubicle requires).

Desktop virtualization is a great way to reduce your IT costs and help save the environment at the same time. Just keep in mind that the type of virtualization approach makes a big difference, and client-based virtual desktops are by far the greenest option.

Purnima Padmanabhan, VP of Products & Marketing

VDI Project? One question to make sure you ask.

We recently hosted a CIO summit that was attended by several CIOs, representing some of the largest organizations in the US. The topic was desktop virtualization, and we had a terrific discussion about ongoing initiatives at each company.

One CIO cited a statistic that was so surprising, shocking really, it really stuck out in our minds. At their organization—one of the premier universities in the world--they’d recently evaluated the use of VDI for university employees. In their analysis, they found the all-in cost of VDI to be nearly $12K per user per year! (sound of jaws hitting floor) When contemplating the necessary server, storage and network improvements, the costs were so prohibitive they dismissed VDI as being completely impractical.

His argument was so sincere and thoughtful that other attendees were heard making mental notes to ask their staffs for a business case on their VDI projects.

If you’re considering, planning, or even deploying VDI, one piece of advice: make sure you ask this question too. If you don’t have a staff, then ask yourself. Or ask your boss. Just don’t let the question go unasked and risk a rude $12K surprise.

Overheard, five years from now: "Tell me again, why did we spend so much on VDI?"

As the story goes, during the 1960s space race, NASA was faced with a major problem. The astronauts needed a pen that could write in the gravity-free environment of space. After a $1.5 million effort, they developed the Astronaut Pen which could write in a vacuum, write with no gravity, and write in extreme temperatures. It was brilliant!

The Russians, faced with the same problem, had a simpler approach: they used a pencil.

This apocryphal tale contains a valid lesson: sometimes we spend a great deal of time, effort and money to create a “high-tech” solution, when a perfectly elegant and low cost solution is right before our eyes. (Of course, one clear alternative to VDI springs to our minds. J)

Question: how many abandoned VDI projects are littering the streets?

The CIO’s comments resonated with many of us, as we’ve heard, particularly recently, of many organizations that have investigated, piloted and ultimately abandoned VDI because the costs were so prohibitive, and because better suited alternatives do exist.

So we ask the question to all of you: how many of you have gone through this experience and ultimately decided to go with status quo or an altogether different approach?

Burt Toma, Director of Products

VDI post on Madden: good observations, different conclusions

Last month, I predicted that VDI will be just a niche play as the cloud matures. Yesterday Brian Madden posted a dramatically different perspective about the extent to which VDI will penetrate computing.

This perspective was not his own, but he thought it interesting enough to write about it. The problem though is that although the observations are reasonable, the conclusions are awful.

Let's look at specific examples.

First, the post notes that computing is changing rapidly, and of course I agree. More apps are moving toward the cloud for simplicity and portability reasons. The apps that will be left behind are rich applications that require local execution. The problem with VDI in this scenario is that you get the worst of both worlds: you get neither the simplicity of the cloud app, nor the functionality of a local app. It just doesn’t make sense to take your fat desktop and stick it into the cloud (except in niche scenarios), since VDI will only become more cumbersome as the cloud matures.

A second observation in the post invokes Moore’s law, saying that as servers become better and cheaper, the cost of VDI will drop. This might be true if users continue to use the same applications, but that’s not how computing works. Applications will continue to expand and consume the additional server bandwidth, negating any savings from Moore’s law.

Thirdly, the post goes on to describe deployment models. The primary pain point that desktop virtualization solves is desktop deployment and centralized management. With a client-based solution, IT can provision an additional VM simply by publishing an html link and sending an email. It’s cheaper, faster, and more resilient than provisioning additional boxes in the datacenter, as you do with VDI.

The post also completely ignores some fundamental issues with VDI. For example, a defining characteristic of VDI is the pooling of resources in the datacenter, but the downside to pooling is that you are magnifying the risks and complexity of desktops—the classic “eggs in one basket” problem. With VDI, you are taking inherently resilient, distributed desktops and turning them into a highly concentrated system that is vulnerable to malfunction. With VDI, if the system goes down, all your desktops go down. A related problem is that IT has to over-provision in order to prepare for peak capacity (e.g., 9:00am on Monday morning). But it’s difficult to predict group behavior, and your “over-provisioning” may prove inadequate, anyway.

Finally, the post fails to address Madden’s own Offline Paradox. Offline capability is at the core of VDI’s shortcomings. There are many times when a user finds himself without an Internet connection, such as on a plane or when the connection goes down for whatever reason. With VDI, users without a connection are unable to access their virtual desktops. This is a key area where a client-based approach excels.

What do you think the future holds? Will virtual desktops live in the datacenter or on the host machine?

Purnima Padmanabhan, VP of Products and Marketing

To centralize, or not to centralize

You wouldn't do this with eggs. Why would you do it with your company's desktops?

Desktop virtualization holds great promise to dramatically reduce IT support costs, while allowing end users unprecedented access and flexibility. There are now dozens of offerings to choose from. But beware – your approach matters. A lot.

Picture the last time your PC crashed. Now imagine it happening to everyone in your company. All at the same time.

It makes complete sense to centralize certain aspects of desktop management. Access and policy control, reporting and image updating, definitely. And certain compute-intensive applications. But it makes little sense to centralize execution.

Desktop execution should (almost) always be decentralized.

A decentralized system is inherently more resilient than a centralized one. No single incident can bring down the productivity of the whole. This has been a truism in computer science, and it’s proven itself in many other systems, not least of which is the Internet itself. On the Internet, no single router or gateway failure can bring down the connectivity of all the endpoints. Instead, in the case of a failure, packets are rerouted around the downed node and transmissions successfully proceed.

Similarly in a decentralized desktop environment, a single PC failure, or even the failure of the management server itself, does not stop the productivity of the whole. Sure, a single user may be inconvenienced (and we all know that certain users are more important than others :) ), but there is no chance that the entire system can come down. When we say “no chance," we don’t actually mean “low probability,” or “five 9s,” etc. With decentralization, there is *no* chance of systemic failure. Nada.

Moreover, a decentralized desktop system is usually lower cost because consumer CPU and storage is much cheaper in aggregate than the equivalent resources in the datacenter. And decentralized execution provides the best user experience, since the user can be online or offline, does not have to worry about bandwidth, and local CPU provides better performance than a centralized remote one.

Now, certain narrow use cases do warrant centralization. But the vast majority of desktops should remain decentralized.

Something to chew on

Even with 14 years of experience and a bazillion dollars, Google’s search services went down last May. What’s the likelihood that your VDI will fare better?





Caveat VDI

Your existing physical desktop environment is already an inherently resilient system. Your company (and your career) can easily survive the occasional user hard drive crash or network issue. But now you’re thinking about scrapping that beautiful architecture, and replacing it at enormous upfront and ongoing costs with an inherently more fragile and risky one. There may be a legitimate cost-risk-benefit reason for you to do this – just be sure you’ve done the analysis.

A better way

Distributed Virtual Desktops (DVDs), a term coined by IDC, represent the low cost, highly flexible world of the New Desktop (capitalization intended). In this model, like your physical desktop solution, DVDs are controlled centrally, so access control, policies, reporting and image management happen efficiently by a single team. But desktops are virtualized so the same golden image can run on any platform, and any hardware configuration. This makes it better than your current physical desktop solution.

And, in stark contrast to VDI, DVDs execute in a decentralized fashion. This means that issues (and we all know issues can happen) are isolated to a single user. As with VDI, there are multiple offerings in the DVD space—MokaFive is one. At MokaFive, the tenet of decentralized execution has been imbued from the very beginning and throughout every aspect of our product design. We believe it’s the only way to go.

Burt Toma, Director of Products

Learnings from our CIO Summit

Last month, we hosted our first quarterly CIO summit session that was attended by several CIOs representing some of the largest organizations in the US. The goal of this session was to investigate the priorities and the associated drivers for end-user computing within these large organizations. Over the course of a terrific power packed discussion, several themes emerged - one of which struck us as very distinctive.

We were expecting the usual themes around cost and control to emerge when, right at the beginning, one of the CIOs of a leading services firm said, “Look, it is not about control. IT doesn’t want to control; we just want to deliver enterprise value at the lowest possible cost, ensuring that every user is productive.” Quite a profound statement. Which brings us to the question, “Why are IT conversations always peppered with the word control?”

Upon further discussion, the answer became clear. The CIOs want to enable user productivity at the lowest cost and risk to the business. In the past, the only way to achieve a reliable, secure desktop was through lockdown and control. But over the years in many organizations, “control” has become the primary objective which, in turn, has lead to myopic decision making.

A number of influences seem to be changing this trend. One reason is that IT is required to support new business initiatives, which cannot be supported using traditional models. As the CIO for a large healthcare firm put it, “I have to enable new work models including teleworking and outsourcing. We hire talent where we get it and do not worry whether it is in the corporate location or not. These users need a secure, reliable working environment at their home, on the go, right at their fingertips at all times.” Second, there are finally a number of solutions now that can enable an IT organization to provide user flexibility without additional cost or risk penalty, so you don’t need to control and lockdown the user. In fact, client- based virtual desktop management solutions like MokaFive can significantly drive the cost and the risks down by enabling single image management across corporate and employee owned assets. (More elaboration in subsequent blog posts).

Another alternative that is commonly considered is VDI. Almost all the CIOs had investigated or were investigating VDI. But they found VDI to be too expensive, too complex, and most importantly, too restrictive for their users. This seems to be a growing sentiment and is reflected well in this article by Randy Eckel . We will explore more of the CIO comments and feedback in upcoming blogs.

Purnima Padmanabhan, VP of Products and Marketing

MokaFive, a green technology?

Yesterday we announced our new round of funding lead by NGEN Partners with contributions from existing investors Khosla Ventures and Highland Capital Partners, MokaFive Raises $21 Million in Venture Capital Funding. Over the past year, we have built a great enterprise-class product that is now deployed within large F1000 companies. With our product now proven in production, this funding allows us to rapidly scale our business and deploy new customers.

Why did a clean technology VC firm like NGEN Partners invest?

Like all successful venture capital firms, first and foremost they seek to invest in companies with a sound business model and huge market potential. Secondly, they look for opportunities to advance the mission and benefits of clean and green environments. You may ask yourself: how is a desktop management (virtualization) company like MokaFive “green”?

It’s very simple. Compared to VDI, or server-based computing, MokaFive's distributed virtual desktop solution offers a 90% reduction in number of servers needed –that is 90% less power, less space, less cooling and less bandwidth. In addition, the model provides *all* the benefits that accrue from a centralized management model. Also, the MokaFive model is a perfect solution to enable green initiatives, such as work from home. You can now simply provide employees with a secure, encapsulated virtual image that can run either on their machine at home or at work (bye-bye to worries about VPN on unknown, unsecured machines, access to terminals over low bandwidth, etc.). Telecommuting avoids not only the fuel used by commuters, but also the overhead energy costs needed to maintain a workplace.

Now, let’s talk about the market potential. End-user computing is being transformed by a huge variety of new devices and increasing numbers of mobile users. This change has marched right into the enterprises. As a result, managing computers with the necessary security and flexibility has become enormously expensive. MokaFive’s revolutionary approach allows you to cut traditional desktop management costs by as much as 50%. Our management solution enables you to maintain a single virtual image across any device and any user (e.g., employee, contractor, or teleworker). The virtual image is deployed to the endpoint so it eliminates the huge outlay in servers that VDI requires. The market potential to deliver a new, more effective model to update and maintain secure corporate environments across disparate, dispersed device and user types.

We are very excited to have NGEN on board, and we look forward to accelerating our business this year.

Purnima Padmanahban, VP of Products

Prediction Piece 2010: BYOPC for Today’s Workforce is a Reality

Is the only driver behind BYOPC attracting and retaining Gen-Y'ers?

Sure, the freshly minted college graduates who are entering your organization today were born in 1988. All they know is instant gratification of having information at their fingertips. As our CTO, John Whaley mentioned in a reply to Andi Mann's article, Is BYOPC Really Key to Attracting Millennials?, "a company that adopts a BYOPC program is more likely to attract millennials just by the fact they consider adopting such a program," not necessarily because it's just a perk to lure them in. Giving them the ability to bring in their hardware of choice, aka Mac, makes you look like the trend-setting, understanding employer (and then you put them to work, of course).

But is this attempt purely altruistic? We think there other drivers worth considering – namely, cost. There are deep cost advantages – some underneath the surface and worth the time to consider. By requiring employees to bring their own hardware, you get out of the hardware support business. Or if you're less inclined to give them complete choice, you have the option of corporate issued choice – you retain your volume discounts and offer a catalog of choices. Think about the flex initiatives that are growing in popularity, where companies are aiming to lower overhead by keeping workers in the office for fewer hours during the week, or fewer days. Now think of BYOPC as synonymous with use of home computers – which is more "use your own" rather than "bring your own." Here, real estate costs can be eliminated, which can represent a large percentage of the operating budget.

A client based managed VM can not only address the above scenarios in a very cost effective way, it can also eliminate the security risk associated with allowing corporate access from unmanaged, unknown endpoints. Cost effective – because it 1) Negates the need to deploy vast amounts of server infrastructure that server hosted virtual desktop solutions require; 2) Allows your users to leverage the distributed assets on hand such as personal PCs 3) Enables you to support new green initiatives such "work from home" and productivity initiative such as "Platform Choice". Secure – because it 1) Eliminates the worry of VPN clients tunneling into the perfect lockdown corporate world from dirty machines since the VPN session can now be established only from within the secure lockdown VM; 2) Removes the need to subject a user to time consuming extensive host AV scanning/could quarantining process.

If BYOPC has not looked that promising before – then it is time to look at it again. This time not just for Gen Y’ers but also for the cost saving that it can deliver to you.

MokaFive solves these exact problems while realizing the cost benefits of eliminating hardware costs, real estate costs, backend infrastructure costs, and excessive overhead. MokaFive's virtual desktop is an isolated virtual machine that sits on the endpoint – yet is fully managed, tied to a server behind the enterprise firewall that filters down policies and settings for the virtual desktop to completely lock it down and ensure safe access to the network. Whether corporate-issued choice (Mac or PC), true BYOPC or work-from-home, the cost savings are clear.

Purnima Padmanabhan, VP of Products and Marketing