That's a good point about VDI vs published desktops. I need to read up on published desktops more before I get too far into VDI. I have licensing for XenDesktop already(part of a deal Citrix did with XenApp a few years back).
On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 4:31 PM, Rankin, James R <[email protected]>wrote: > ** > XenDesktop is often overused where a XenApp published desktop will do, but > implemented badly....users get set against it. If you can afford the > XenDesktop licensing, it's good, but the 1:1 nature of the machines means > it has a lot of overhead in resource and management. > > If you have any specific issues with XenApp feel free to post them to the > list, there's quite a bit of Citrix knowledge on here. > > Cheers, > > > > JR > > Sent from my (new!) BlackBerry, which may make me an antiques dealer, but > it's reliable as hell for email delivery :-) > ------------------------------ > *From: * Jon D <[email protected]> > *Sender: * [email protected] > *Date: *Tue, 29 Oct 2013 15:53:27 -0400 > *To: *<[email protected]> > *ReplyTo: * [email protected] > *Subject: *Re: [NTSysADM] VPN and high bandwidth applications > > Thanks for everyone's responses so far! Responses below: > > >>Wouldn't something like Citrix XenApp offload the performance hit onto > the local network for your remote users? > Good suggestion. We're actually already using it(have been for 10+ years), > but end-users hate it. > I might end up trying something like XenDesktop and see if they like that > better just for remote access.... > > > >>It is, however, something that WAN accelerators were designed to help > mitigate. > I saw that Riverbed has a mobile client which sounds interesting. > > > >>So normally the SQL traffic is between the users desktop and the sql > backend? > Yeah for some of the apps the traffic from the workstation can easily hit > 100megs doing a normal operation or query. > > > >>A VPN is just a network link. Nothing more, nothing less. Think of it > like a really long Ethernet cable. > Very good point. I'm over thinking it. I think the end-users have psyched > me out by keep saying all other companies have VPNs. It seems like using a > VPN w/o something like RDP or Citrix is only useful for simple apps like > outlook/word/excel/etc. > > > Summary: Sounds like a VPN is what it is, and something like Citrix is the > current best solution for chatty apps... > > > Thanks, > Jon > > > On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 1:22 PM, Ben Scott <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 12:09 PM, Jon D <[email protected]> wrote: >> > I'm not an expert with VPNs... >> >> A VPN is just a network link. Nothing more, nothing less. Think of >> it like a really long Ethernet cable. >> >> > Is it possible to have end-users use any sort of VPN technology to >> access >> > high-bandwidth apps? >> >> (1) I'm with others in the "Use a VPN to access the network >> remotely; use RDP (or Citrix or whatever) to run applications that >> aren't WAN friendly" camp. I see them as complementary technologies, >> not replacements for each other. >> >> (2) Bandwidth is only part of the equation. Latency (AKA packet >> delay AKA round trip time) is just as important. Indeed, latency is >> usually more of a problem these days, because everybody's talking >> bandwidth and ignoring latency, so you have to fight just to find >> someone who understands the problem. In other words: If you have a >> gigabit link with RTT at 300 ms, it will still feel like an old analog >> modem. >> >> -- Ben >> >> >> >
