VMware View 3.0
VMware's VDI solution makes virtual desktops real, but not particularly easy to manage
- Building a VMware View infrastructure is relatively simple
- Management leaves much to be desired, user experience can be spotty, Web interface is fairly picky about which browser is used
All in all, VMware View is a functional VDI implementation with more than a few quirks and foibles.
Price$ 4,197.73 (AUD)
Following the creation of a linked clone pool, View uses the snapshot taken of the source VM to devise a baseline desktop instance, and then builds the remainder of the desktop pool from that image. Each desktop is assigned a name derived from the baseline name given in the setup wizard, followed by an incrementing number. Each Windows desktop is also Sysprepped and readied for log-in. The time required to construct this farm varies greatly, depending on the number of desktops produced, the speed of the VMware ESX host, and the speed of the storage behind the host. Once generated, the pool is visible in the VMware ViewAdministrator, and security settings can be assigned.
With VMware View, it's possible to formulate any number of desktop pools and assign them to various Active Directory user groups. For instance, you might have a pool for finance, a pool for engineering, and a pool for executives. Each pool might have a different source VM containing different applications, RAM allocations, and CPU allowances, and the pools would be assigned to varying groups for appropriate access.
To end-users, all of these desktop farms appear as options in the client, and users can access their desktops by selecting the appropriate pool.
One of the major benefits to VDI is the ability to quickly and easily add and remove applications, patches, and service packs to large numbers of desktops. With VMware View, this is handled by rebuilding the desktop pool from a different source snapshot than the original. To accomplish this, the original source VM is booted, the necessary changes are made, the source VM is shut down, and an updated snapshot is taken. Then the desktop pool is edited in the VMware View Administrator, whereby each desktop in the pool is shut down, rebuilt from the new source snapshot, and placed back into active service. This can be done immediately, forcing all users to log off, or it can be done gradually, as each user logs off his or her session.
Updating the desktop pool is not a fast process, though that speed is highly dependent on the storage in use. It should be noted that even small changes to the pool, such as modifying the RAM allocated to each desktop VM, require a complete pool rebuild. This should be simpler, but nevertheless beats the process for updating physical desktops.
There are a number of ways to connect to a View desktop VM. Linux, Mac OS X, and Windows clients can all use the Web interface and the Java client, while Windows can use a dedicated VMware View Client as well. Linux systems can also use the VMware View Open Client, which is an open source initiative by VMware to deliver a client that can be run on a broad range of platforms.
There are caveats to each of these methods, however. The best of the bunch seems to be the VMware View Client for Windows, which is slightly odd in that you need to be running Windows on a PC already, somewhat defeating the purpose of VDI. The Java client is very functional and runs well -- with the exception of video and audio reproduction -- on every platform I tested. Visiting YouTube while connected with the Java client is essentially a non-starter, with poor video and spotty audio. Audio streaming alone was better.
The VMware View Open Client for Linux is arguably the fastest client, but does not support audio or USB redirection, which will make it unusable in many installations. This is a shame, since this client could form the basis of a simple transition from physical desktops to VDI by allowing admins to leverage existing hardware to attach to the VMware View farm without paying for additional licenses. From what I understand, the lack of these functions is legal and political, not technical. Hopefully these artificial hurdles will be overcome soon. The Open Client really needs to be fully functional, or it's just not viable.
Join the PC World newsletter!
Most Popular Reviews
- 1 Sony Xperia Z4 Tablet (LTE) review: The tablet of choice for anyone on Android
- 2 Bose SoundLink Mini II Bluetooth speaker review
- 3 Apple MacBook Air 2015 review: Only better with time
- 4 HTC One (M8s) review: Better value for money than HTC's flagship
- 5 ZTE Blade S6 review: A dual-SIM, 4G smartphone for less than $300
Deals on PC World
- Networking, Wireless & VoIP
Deals on PC World
Latest News Articles
- Lenovo expands product recall for ThinkPad laptop batteries
- Microsoft plants flagship store on Sydney’s Pitt Street
- Lenovo’s WRITEit app to supply more handwriting support for Windows devices
- For Microsoft, hardware and OS consistency key in Surface 3
- HP LaserJets use a new type of toner particle that can improve energy efficiency and print speed
GGG Evaluation Team
First impression on unpacking the Q702 test unit was the solid feel and clean, minimalist styling.
For work use, Microsoft Word and Excel programs pre-installed on the device are adequate for preparing short documents.
The Fujitsu LifeBook UH574 allowed for great mobility without being obnoxiously heavy or clunky. Its twelve hours of battery life did not disappoint.
The screen was particularly good. It is bright and visible from most angles, however heat is an issue, particularly around the Windows button on the front, and on the back where the battery housing is located.
My first impression after unboxing the Q702 is that it is a nice looking unit. Styling is somewhat minimalist but very effective. The tablet part, once detached, has a nice weight, and no buttons or switches are located in awkward or intrusive positions.