Idc Vcc Mcs 2010 Final

Copyright 2010 IDC. Reproduction is forbidden unless authorized. All rights reserved.

Multi-Client Study

Brett Waldman, Ian Song, Bob O'Donnell, Fred Broussard, Al Gillen

Mar-11© 2010 IDC Source: 2010 IDC Virtual Client Computing MCS 2

Agenda

Overview

Industry trend and data

Driver to adoption

Current deployment stages

Technologies

Services

Barriers

Opportunities

Essential Guidance


Objective

The increasing availability and maturity of technologies that organizations are using to virtualize the client environment are

causing many IT vendors to question what the future state of the desktop environment will look like, and where the opportunities

and risks lie. This study represents a targeted analysis of the range of technologies that enable the virtualization of the client

environment, including:

Centralized Virtual Desktop (aka VDI) (VMware View, Citrix XenDesktop)

Application Virtualization (Microsoft App-V, VMware ThinApp)

Virtual User Session Software (Microsoft Terminal Services, Citrix XenApp)

Distributed Virtual Desktops (VMware Player, Microsoft Virtual PC)

Although this study will consider all of these technologies individually, it will primarily focus on the use of Application

Virtualization, Virtual User Session Software, and Distributed Virtual Desktops within the context of a Centralized Virtual Desktop

environment, which over the past year has evolved from an emerging technology into a viable deployment model either used by

or of interest to most enterprise IT organizations. This study is intended to shed light on the following issues, among other things:

General short-term deployment expectations for Application Virtualization, Virtual User Session software, Distributed Virtual

Desktops, and Centralized Virtual Desktop within medium, large and enterprise IT organizations.

The impact that the current and expected future economic environment has had (is having) on customer deployments of the

technologies in question.

How organizations manage Centralized Virtual Desktop, in comparison to how they manage their traditional, thick PC

environments.

Motivations for the use of Application Virtualization, Virtual User Session software, and Distributed Virtual Desktops change

when used within a Centralized Virtual Desktop infrastructure, compared to the use of those technologies individually.

The objective of this study is to answer the above questions and more, in order to provide vendors with the holistic and

pragmatic market data they need to make decisions about how to respond to the trends emerging in the use of virtualization of

the client environment.


Agenda

Overview


Driver to adoption


Technologies

Services

Barriers

Opportunities

Essential Guidance

Mar-11© 2010 IDC Source: 2010 IDC Virtual Client Computing MCS

Respondent statistics

5

QD2. What is your current job title or role? (Yellow)

QB3a. Who within the organization was primarily driving the initiative to consider client

virtualization? (Red)

N=208

.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0%

Other

Dept Head

IS/IT Professional

Mid-Level IT Execs

Sen. Level IT Executives

CIO

CEO

Work Title Driving initiative

CIO/CTO are typically vision

driven, thus is important to offer

holistic packages rather then specific

solutions


Challenges: Management

6

QB1a. What is your greatest management challenge in your current PC environment?

5.8%

7.2%

10.6%

12.5%

13.0%

14.4%

16.8%

19.7%

.0% 5.0% 10.0% 15.0% 20.0% 25.0%

OS Management

Other (specify)

Device Management

Complexity

Data Management

Preventing users from making changes

Configuration Control

Application Management

N=208

• App management is biggest

challenge• App virtualization makes

great entry to VCC

• Configuration Control issues

shows need for VDI and

management tools

• Controlling user access is

another opportunity for

implementing client

virtualization


Challenges: End user related

7

QB1b. What is your greatest end user related challenge in your current PC environment?

3.8%

5.8%

6.3%

6.7%

9.1%

9.6%

18.8%

19.2%

20.7%

.0% 5.0% 10.0% 15.0% 20.0% 25.0%

Other (specify)

User Authentication

Worldwide User access to their work

Data Loss

Disaster Recovery

Password Security

Compliance/Governance issues

Data Security

Training for new users

N=208

• Training, Security, Complian

ce top end user issues

• Offering consultative

services addressing these

top concerns can create

opportunities


Challenges: Hardware

8

QB1c. What is your greatest hardware challenge in your current PC environment?

4.8%

4.8%

17.8%

23.6%

49.0%

.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0%

Other (specify)

Power consumption

Disaster recovery

Scalability

Hardware costs

N=208

• Hardware costs top issue

• Customers need to understand

that VCC does not help with

CAPEX costs

• Need to focus on long term

TCO, and OPEX reduction


Challenges: Software

9

QB1d. What is your greatest software challenge in your current PC environment?

N=208

1.4%

7.7%

9.6%

13.9%

32.7%

34.6%

.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0%

Other (specify)

Disaster Recovery

Data Loss

Client OS migration

Software license costs

Application deployment

• App deployment and

software license costs

greatest software challenges

• Very related to app

management issues, and

can be addressed by app

virtualization

• OS migration, data loss and

DR not seen big concerns• These issues occur too

infrequently to be on the

top of mind


Industry Trend: Verticals

QA1. What industry classification best represents your site's principal business activity?

3.8%4.3%

5.3%

6.7%7.2%

7.7%

9.6%

11.1%

12.0%

13.5%

18.8%

0.0%

2.0%

4.0%

6.0%

8.0%

10.0%

12.0%

14.0%

16.0%

18.0%

20.0%

N=208


Industry Trend: Technologies utilized by respondents (verticals)

• Financial and manufacturing

leading VDI implementation

• Customers are becoming

savvy about picking the right

technology

61%

65%

29%

32%

62%

69%

44%

46%

35%

52%

35%

26%

42%

38%

26%

23%

48%

58%

42%

35%

50%

55%

36%

33%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%

CVD

VUS

App Virt

DVD

Total (N=208) Other (N=62) Gov't & Edu (N=53)

Services (N=23) Manufacturing (N=39) Financial (N=31)

QA6: Percent of company vertical who use this type of technology in its production environment?


Organization size

QA3a. How many PCs would you estimate your entire company to have?

22.1%

12.5%

7.7%

12.0%

16.8%

9.1%

19.7%

.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

500 to 1,000 1,000 to 2,499 2,500 to 4,999 5,000 to 10,000 10,000 to 24,99925,000 to 49,999 50,000+

N=208


Industry Trend: Technologies utilized by respondents (Size)

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%

CVD

VUS

App Virt

DVD

Total (N=208)

50,000+ (N=41)

25,000 to 49,999 (N=19)

10,000 to 24,999 (N=35)

5,000 to 10,000 (N=25)

2,500 to 4,999 (N=16)

1,000 to 2,499 (N=26)

500 to 1,000 (N=46)

QA6: Percent of company size who use this type of technology in its production environment?


Agenda

Overview


Driver to adoption


Technologies

Services

Barriers

Opportunities

Essential Guidance


Drivers to adoption

Business Drivers Technology Drivers

Lower total Lifecycle management

costs

Simplify management of Applications,

Hardware and OS

Lower total costs compare to traditional

PCs

Improve data security

Lower endpoint device costs Disaster Recovery Planning

Improving regulatory compliance Improve scalability

Decrease power consumption OS Migration

Reduce user downtime, support call


Driver to adoption (per technology)

1.3%

2.6%

14.5%

5.3%

18.4%

11.8%

25.0%

26.3%

25.0%

28.9%

19.7%

30.3%

38.2%

34.2%

3.8%

7.5%

13.2%

11.3%

18.9%

13.2%

18.9%

24.5%

15.1%

28.3%

26.4%

39.6%

34.0%

3.8%

11.5%

9.6%

13.5%

19.2%

26.9%

15.4%

17.3%

17.3%

28.8%

23.1%

21.2%

15.4%

46.2%

0.0%

14.8%

11.1%

11.1%

11.1%

14.8%

14.8%

18.5%

14.8%

11.1%

37.0%

22.2%

48.1%

33.3%

Other

Decrease Power Consumption

OS Migration

Regulatory Compliance

Limit User Downtime/Lost Productivity

Disaster Recovery/Preparedness

Lower Endpoint Device Costs

Lower total lifecycle costs compared to a PC

Lower total lifecycle costs

Data Security

Improve Scalability

Simplify OS Management

Simplify Hardware Management

Simplify Application Management

Centralized Virtual Desktops Virtual User Session Application Virtualization Distributed Virtual DesktopsN=76 N=53 N=52 N=27


Agenda

Overview


Driver to adoption


Technologies

Services

Barriers

Opportunities

Essential Guidance


Summary

• VUS is a mature technology

• Customers are still figuring out how to apply App virt and

DVD in their organizations

• CVD is still leading VCC growth in the next 12 – 18 month

• No surprise, Public sector, Financial and education are

leading VCC adoption

18


Current deployments: Per technology

QA6. Does your company use client virtualization in its production environment or are you

currently testing or piloting it? If not, are you considering it?

N=208

32.7%

35.6%

55.3%

49.5%

32.2%

26.9%

21.6%

33.2%

9.1%

11.1%

7.2%

6.7%

24.5%

25.5%

14.4%

10.6%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

DVD

App Virt

VUS

CVD

Use in production Testing/Piloting

Considering Not currently considering

Not Sure

• VUS is a mature technology – it

has the highest penetration in

production• Also easiest to deploy without

downtime

• High interest in CVD, App virt and

DVD

• Current development and interests

in VCC suggest customers are

more interested in virtualizing the

entire desktop environment rather

than just the apps


Current deployments: CVD by industry

QA6a1. Does your company use CVD in its production environment or are you currently

testing or piloting it? If not, are you considering it?

50.7%

60.0%

34.8%

36.0%

46.4%

61.5%

49.5%

26.7%

35.0%

43.5%

52.0%

35.7%

20.5%

33.2%

8.9%

5.0%

4.3%

4.0%

10.3%

6.7%

8.9%

17.4%

8.0%

17.9%

7.7%

10.6%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

All Other (N=73)

Financial (N=20)

Services (N=23)

Education (N=25)

Government (N=28)

Manufacturing (N=39)

Total (N=208)

Use in production environment Currently testing/piloting


Not sure of futuer plans

• Manufacturing and Financial

verticals are the leaders in

production deployments

• Opportunities exist in industries

that has high numbers in testing

phase


Current deployments: VUS by industry

QA6b1. Does your company use Virtual User Session in its production environment or are

you currently testing or piloting it? If not, are you considering it?

64.4%

65.0%

52.2%

32.0%

42.9%

69.2%

55.3%

14.9%

30.0%

30.4%

32.0%

25.0%

7.7%

21.6%

4.5%

4.3%

3.6%

12.8%

7.2%

16.3%

5.0%

13.0%

28.0%

28.6%

7.7%

14.4%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

All Other (N=73)

Financial (N=20)

Services (N=23)

Education (N=25)

Government (N=28)


Total (N=208)




• VUS is very mature, which is

shown by the wide adoption rate

across industries

• Opportunities exist in the public

sector, services and financial

verticals where users

environments are standardized


Current deployments: App-virt by industry

QA6c1. Does your company use Application Virtualization in its production environment or

are you currently testing or piloting it? If not, are you considering it?

38.4%

35.0%

34.8%

28.0%

25.0%

43.6%

35.6%

23.3%

40.0%

43.5%

40.0%

17.9%

15.4%

26.9%

17.8%

10.0%

4.3%

16.0%

7.1%

2.6%

11.1%

20.5%

15.0%

13.0%

16.0%

50.0%

35.9%

25.5%

0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0% 70.0% 80.0% 90.0% 100.0%

All Other (N=73)

Financial (N=20)

Services (N=23)

Education (N=25)

Government (N=28)


Total (N=208)




• Different types of app-virt

technologies are preventing

wide adoption

• Service opportunities lie with

helping customers finding

the right solution

• Increasingly becoming a

feature and stepping stone

to a holistic VCC solution


Current deployments: DVD by industry

QA6d1. Does your company use Distributed Virtual Desktop in its production environment

or are you currently testing or piloting it? If not, are you considering it?

32.9%

32.3%

34.8%

24.0%

21.4%

46.2%

32.7%

34.2%

41.9%

26.1%

28.0%

32.1%

28.2%

32.2%

9.6%

12.9%

4.3%

12.0%

10.7%

5.1%

9.1%

23.3%

12.9%

30.4%

28.0%

35.7%

20.5%

24.5%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

All Other (N=73)

Financial (N=20)

Services (N=23)

Education (N=25)

Government (N=28)


Total (N=208)




• Adoption is low, manufacturing

is an outlier

• DVD management technology

is still relatively new

• Data security and compliance

are concerns compared to

other VCC solutions


Agenda

Agenda

Overview


Driver to adoption


Technologies

Services

Barriers

Opportunities

Essential Guidance


Summary

• Hypervisor usage is on par with datacenter trends

• Density is king

• Servers used for CVD have slightly more sockets and memory

compared to a typical virtualized server

• SAN is the standard, mid-market and SMB utilizes NAS

25


Datacenter: hypervisors

QA5b. What is the primary server virtualization software you use? (yellow)

QD11. What virtualization platform do you support centralized virtual desktop environment? (red)

60.6%

10.6%

5.8%

10.1%

4.8%

8.2%

55.3%

7.9%9.2%

6.6%9.2%

11.8%

.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

VMware ESX/

vSphere

VMware Server

Microsoft Virtual Server

Microsoft Hyper-V

Citrix XenServer

Other

Total (N=208) Centralized Virtual Desktops (N=76)

Key stats:

100% respondents utilize Server

Virtualization (QA5a, QA5b)

• 71.2% use VMware (ESX & GSX)

• 15.9% use Microsoft (Vserver &

Hyper-V)

• 4.8% use Citrix (XenServer)

• 8.2% use Other vendors

Note: Does not necessarily reflect current market

conditions


Datacenter: Sockets

QD10b. What is the typical number of sockets?

5.3%

25.0%

46.1%

6.6%

13.2%

3.9%

.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

35.0%

40.0%

45.0%

50.0%

1 physical socket

2-3 physical sockets



16 or more physical sockets

Don't know

N=76

• Note respondents may

have confused what is a

socket and what is a core

• Customers typically look

to latest hardware to

create highest density

platform possible

• Typically buy from same

hardware vendor they are

already using for server

virtualization


Datacenter: Memory

28

QD9. On average, how much RAM do the

physical servers have that currently or will

support your centralized virtual desktops?

22.4%

11.8%

26.3%

22.4%

13.2%

3.9%

.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

8GB or less 16GB 32GB 64GB More than 64GB

Don't know

• Amount of physical memory

typically correspond to the # of

sockets

• Customers typically look to latest

hardware to create highest

density platform possible

• Customers are actually adding

more memory to CVD hardware

than typical server virtualization

workloads

N=76


Datacenter: CVD VM density

QD12. On average, how many virtual desktops do you host on a single server?

9.2%

22.4%

23.7%

14.5%

13.2%

7.9%

3.9%

1.3%

3.9%

.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

Less than 5

5-10 11-20 21-30 31-40 41-50 51-100 101-150 151+

N=76

• VM density usually go up

when organizations deploy

CVD into production

• VM density is not typically

constrained by server

hardware

• Networking and storage

issues are bottlenecks


Datacenter: CVD Storage

QD17. What type of storage is primarily used with your centralized virtual desktop environment?

18.4%

35.5%17.1%

27.6%

1.3%

Direct Attached Storage (DAS) Network Attached Storage (NAS)

iSCSI (SAN) Fibre Channel (SAN)

Don't know

N=76

• 67% of respondents plan

to add storage to support

a CVD environment

(QD18)

• SAN is top type of

storage• Fibre channel is

preferred over iSCSI

• NAS has surprisingly high

share• Customers are probably

just using what they

already have


Summary

• 3rd party CVD solutions dominate market

• Custom market is both a competitor and opportunity

• VMware has the market-share lead

• Citrix is catching up fast

• Too early to declare winner

• Windows 7 a time sensitive opportunity

• Thin client complement VCC very well, poised to grow

• HP and Wyse are leaders in the thin-client segment

• 3rd party management solutions and standardization are

dominate management style

31


Technology: Client Software – CVD

N=76

QD14a. Are you using a packaged centralized virtual desktop solution from

a 3rd party like VMware View or Citrix XenDesktop or did you build your

own custom solution?

Custom37%

3rd party63%

CVD• Using CVD without a 3rd

party solution is a very

viable option

• If you are not worried

about graphics, using it

over a LAN only, and can

apply existing PC mgmt

tools – custom solutions

makes a lot of sense

• 3rd party tools need to

add value• WAN capabilities

• High end graphics

• Improved mgmt


Technology: Client Software – CVD

N=48

QD14b. Which 3rd party centralized virtual desktop solution do you use

50.0%

35.4%

8.3%

6.3%

Citrix

XenDesktop

VMware

View

Microsoft VDI

Suites

Others

• Small sample size may

be affecting these results

• Survey was done in

March and does not take

into account recent sales

and marketing efforts

from Citrix which may

have changed landscape


Technology: Client Software – OS

QD8. What client operating systems do you currently use within your environment?

And in 18 month?

N=208

4%

5%

0%

1%

36%

5%

49%

3%

5%

1%

3%

73%

5%

11%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%

Other

Linux

Windows NT

Windows 2000

Windows XP

Windows Vista

Windows 7

Current In 18 Month

• Windows 7 shares will

grow ~38% in the next 18

month, most of it come

from Windows XP

migration

• Migrations are causing

CIO’s to evaluate VCC• Time to strike is now

• After Win 7

migration, CIOs may

back off VCC for

sometime


Technology: Client Hardware

QD5. What is the PRIMARY device that users currently access their solution?

50.0%43.4%

50.9%57.7%

28.8%

27.6%

37.7% 21.2%

12.5%

15.8%

9.4%

11.5%

4.8%6.6%

7.7%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%


Virtual User Session (N=53) Application Virtualization (N=52)

New desktop or mobile PC Legacy desktop or mobile PC Thin Client Desktop

Mobile Thin Client Diskless PC Other (please specify)


Technology: Client Hardware

QD6. About 18 months from now, which of the following do you expect users

will use as their PRIMARY device to access their [technology] solution?

44.2%38.2%

45.3% 46.2%

20.2%

22.4%

26.4%

15.4%

18.3%21.1%

15.1%

17.3%

11.5% 9.2%9.4%

19.2%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%


Virtual User Session (N=53) Application Virtualization (N=52)

New Traditional desktop or mobile PC Legacy Traditional desktop or mobile PC

Thin Client Desktop Mobile Thin Client

Diskless PC


Technology: Client Hardware – Thin Clients

37

.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

Le

ss th

an

25

0

25

0 to

49

9

50

0 to

1,0

00

1,0

00

to

2,4

99

2,5

00

to

4,9

99

5,0

00

to

10

,00

0

10

,00

0 to

24

,99

9

25

,00

0 to

49

,99

9

50

,00

0+

Total (N=208)

CVD (N=76)

VUS (N=53)

Application Virtualization (N=52)

DVD (N=27)

• A majority of organizations

have fewer than 250 clients

• Almost 30% have larger

installations of 1,000 or higher

• Not surprisingly, thin client

adoption is higher with sites

deploying CVD

• New “zero” clients optimized

for CVD should drive this

higher

QA4a: How many thin clients are in your organization?


Technology: Client Hardware – Thin Clients

N=70

QD6b. From which manufacturer did you (or will you) purchase your thin clients?

47.1%

32.9%

28.6%

7.1% 7.1%

1.4% 1.4% 1.4%

.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

HP Wyse Dell Not sure Other Oracle Sun

Fujitsu DevonIT

• 75% of respondents

(N=208) states that they

will have a mixture of PCs

and thin-clients in their

production environment

(QD7)

• Dell only resells other

vendors thin

clients, mostly

Wyse, which may make

Wyse the market leader


QE1. What methods are you using for tracking and managing software on PCs?

(multiple answers allowed)

Technology: Management

• Most organizations have solution for

managing PCs• Implies process oriented

management capabilities and

receptivity to process automation for

managing the virtualized desktop the

same way as for the server

• For respondents with no tools to

manage their PCs, there is the

opportunity to address lower virtual

machine costs due to implementing

standardized management

63.2%66.0%

46.2%48.1%

52.6%

41.5%38.5%

55.6%

31.6%

35.8%

26.9%

48.1%

.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

CVD (N=76) VUS (N=53) App virt (N=52) DVD (N=27)

Use a 3rd party tool Track through standard build

Scripts are used Use in-house sw solution

Manually identify apps on each PC Freeware tools are used

Plan to add a 3rd party tool


QE2. Which 3rd party tool do you use?

Technology: Management

• Microsoft strength not a

surprise

• Main rationale for not

lowering costs is because

of use of these 3rd party

tools

• Migration to Windows 7 a

focus of both the 3rd part

tool vendor and

enterprise over the next

18 months or so

29.8%

37.1%33.3%

46.2%

29.8%

28.6%33.3%

15.4%

14.9%

14.3%8.3%

15.4%

4.3% 8.6%4.2%

7.7%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

CVD (N=47) VUS (N=35) App virt (N=24) DVD (N=13)

Novell ZENworks

HP Radia, Client Server mgr

Numara Track-it

IBM Tivoli

Altiris(Symantec)

Other

Microsoft SCCM/SMS


Agenda

Agenda

Overview


Driver to adoption


Technologies

Services

Barriers

Opportunities

Essential Guidance


Services

• Early adopter are DIYers

• Solution support and education are top services today

• Customers choose service providers based on familiarity and

expertise

42


Services: Internal vs ExternalTotal VCC

43

82%

81%

79%

75%

74%

71%

67%

67%

61%

60%

12%

7%

15%

6%

18%

13%

20%

18%

28%

27%

6%

12%

6%

19%

8%

16%

13%

14%

12%

13%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Implementation & Migration

Biz or ROI Justification

Proof of Concept

User Segmentation

Hosting

Strategy Workshop or Biz Plan

Design Services

Optimization

Education Services

Solution Support

Internal Resources External Resources No plans to implement

QF1. With regard to [technology], for [x] services, please indicate whether you plan to use internal resources, plan

to hire an outside services firm, or don’t plan on implementing at all.

• Early adopters are very

much DIYers

• Solution Support and

Education Services are

top external services

• Neither are surprising in a

emerging market

• Customers are under-

appreciating user

segmentation• Most advanced (and

successful)

deployments are doing

this


Services

QE5. Who implemented or will implement your [technology] environment?

69.7%

59.2%

77.4% 76.9%70.4%

14.4%

25.0%

7.5% 5.8%14.8%

10.6% 10.5% 11.3%9.6%

11.1%

5.3% 5.3% 3.8%7.7%

3.7%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Total (N=208)

Centralized Virtual

Desktops (N=76)

Virtual User Session (N=53)

Application Virtualization

(N=52)

Distributed Virtual

Desktops (N=27)

Outsourced everything to a company specializing in thisVAR/Reseller helped us

Product vendor(s) helped us

Did it all ourselves

• Early adopters are very

much DIYers

• As VCC goes mainstream

services opportunities will

explode

• VCC experience and

reputation is #1 attribute

of chosen outsourcer• Many have close ties to

either VMware or Citrix


Services: External vendors

QF2. Which external vendors did you use or plan to use to implement?

26.7% 27.9% 30.0%20.0%

29.4%

22.5%18.6%

16.7%33.3% 23.5%

20.0%

27.9%

30.0%10.0%

17.5%

9.3% 26.7%

20.0%

17.6%

15.0%14.0% 6.7%

20.0%

23.5%

10.8%11.6% 20.0%

11.8%

5.8%2.3%

6.7%

13.3%

5.8% 2.3% 6.7%

23.5%

4.2%2.3%

6.7%3.3%

5.9%

3.3% 7.0%3.3%

.8%5.9%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Total (N=120) Centralized Virtual Desktops

(N=43)

Virtual User Session (N=30)

Application Virtualization

(N=30)

Distributed Virtual Desktops

(N=17)

Accenture

EMC

Cisco

Dell

Sun/Oracle

Citrix

Microsoft

IBM

Other

HP

VMware

• Of people who use

external services VMware

and HP lead the way

• Other is very strong as

customers want vendors

with strong expertise in

VCC


Agenda

Agenda

Overview


Driver to adoption


Technologies

Services

Barriers

Opportunities

Essential Guidance


Barriers

47

Organizational Technical

Buy-in Solution cost

User acceptance Technical limitation

Internal know-how Solution complexity

Politics Solution maturity

Security risks Vendor support

Low priority


Top Reasons NOT to use VCC

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

35.0%

40.0%

CVD (N=36) VUS (N=48) App Virt (N=78)

DVD (N=73)

We plan to use it sometime in the future

I don't know enough about said technology

Still need to get users trained and accepting of the solution

We are considering using it sometime in the future.

Still looking for overall company acceptance of new ways of computing for users.The price of the solution is too high.

Product/technology is not mature enough

I am satisfied with traditional PC management

We do not have enough free time to try new technologies at this timeWe do not have budget at this time

Other, please explain

48

• Not using VCC

because

• No budget

• No free time

• Price is not an issue

• Other is so high for

DVD due to lack of

education


Barriers: Organizational

QC1a. What are the top 2 INTERNAL barriers you have faced while considering the deployment / pilot of

client virtualization within your environment?

44.7%

47.2%

36.5%

55.6%

35.5%37.7%

26.9%25.9%

30.3%

39.6%

30.8%

25.9%26.3%

20.8%

36.5%

14.8%

21.1%

15.1%

23.1%

40.7%

23.7%

18.9%17.3%

11.1%

.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

Centralized Virtual Desktops (N=76) Virtual User Session (N=53) Application Virtualization (N=52) Distributed Virtual Desktops (N=27)

Internal Organizational Buy-in User acceptance of the solution Internal know-how Internal Politics Security Risks Low IT priority


Barriers: Technical

QC1b. What are the top 2 TECHNOLOGY barriers you have faced while considering the deployment / pilot

of [technology] within your environment?

59.2% 60.4%63.5%

81.5%

56.6%54.7%

51.9%

59.3%

28.9% 30.2%32.7%

37.0%

26.3%

22.6%

26.9%

18.5%17.1%

18.9%

15.4%

11.1%13.2% 13.2%

11.5%

3.7%

.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

Centralized Virtual Desktops (N=76) Virtual User Session (N=53) Application Virtualization (N=52) Distributed Virtual Desktops (N=27)

HW & SW Cost Technical Limitations Other Complexity Maturity/Sophistication Solution support


Agenda

Agenda

Overview


Driver to adoption


Technologies

Services

Barriers

Opportunities

Essential Guidance


Opportunities

• Management is key to scale – partner opportunities abound

• LANDesk, Altiris likely starting points

• Management can help overcome certain technical barriers

• Bandwidth and boot-storms

• Think holistically

• Need to be able to manage VCC, thin clients and traditional clients from single console

• Education, training, and integration services are top priorities

• As desktops move into the datacenter, tighter integration will be required

• Datacenter IT will need to learn certain desktop skills

• Desktop as a Service will become a reality (at least internally)

• Win7 migration – a short term opportunity

• 18-24 months left in this window

• Don’t expect Windows 8 to provide this opportunity again

52


Agenda

Agenda

Overview


Driver to adoption


Technologies

Services

Barriers

Opportunities

Essential Guidance


Summary

• Relatively small percentages of the organization are using virtualized desktops in any form• As little as 15% of clients are virtualized• VUS is most mature, CVD is the hottest, and people are still confused about

DVD

• Of the respondents, the top three vendors (VMware, Microsoft, Citrix) represented almost 92% of the server virtualization market.

• Desktop virtualization is in the production environment, as well as in test and dev• Though production deployments are not scaling, yet!

• Increased use of desktop virtualization solutions are expected in the future• 15.3% of respondent desktops were using CVD, and expected to go to

25.1% in 12 months.


Summary

• Top criteria for selecting a vendor• Cost, Reliability and Service/Support..

• CIO is primary driver of client virtualization technology adoption, as well as IT staff

• PC expected to be the dominant form factor over the next 18 months• Windows 7 will be the dominant OS on that platform to work alongside

client virtualization solutions

• 69.7% of respondents did the implementation into production themselves

• Data shows clear preference for “Do it yourself” implementations, migrations, education• 60 – 80% of respondents felt they could handle tasks themselves in

areas around migration, education, training, rollout…• 13% plan to use external resources


Summary

• Lower costs not top reason for deploying/piloting the virtualization technologies • Simplifying application management• Simplifying hardware and OS management• Lower costs are not top of mind

• Top reasons for not using desktop virtualization:• Do not have budget• Technology not mature enough• I am satisfied with existing PC management• Considering it in the future

• 30% of respondents report supporting 31 or more virtual desktops from a single server, up to 150 or more. • suggest that management complexity is greater for the shops with more than 50

virtual desktops per server (same problem as on server virtualization)


Summary

• 56.3% of respondents considered the technology strategic rather than tactical• Surprising given the small #’s of virtual desktops across the companies

implementing virtual desktops in any form.

• 31.6% responded that it took less than 6 months to implement their desktop virtualization solution into production• Remaining 69.4% were in the 6 months or more to implement

• Due to inexperience, funding, technology maturity, etc

• Top 3 benefits seen as a result of implementing in production• Simplify hardware management 41.4%• Simplify OS/Application management 34.2%• Improved scalability 30.9%


Essential Guidance

Interest in client virtualization is high, but so is confusion about the technology

Huge amount of educational efforts still necessary, even on basic virtualization

principles

Don’t assume knowledge in developing marketing materials

Many adopters only focus on one small aspect of solution and miss the bigger

picture

Both an opportunity and a challenge

– Opportunity is to find the specific functions that either help save costs or solve a

problem for organizations and highlight them

– Challenge is they don’t see or utilize the broader capabilities made possible

ROI benefits cited by users tend to be focused on very specific, practical issues, not

the more grandiose potential of rethinking entire desktop PC strategy

E.g., reducing licensing costs

58


Essential Guidance

Most customers still focus on PCs as the end point, but interest in thin clients is

growing

Many IT shops take a conservative approach and go with what they know

New “zero client” products optimized for CVD should help

Perception is that thin clients still too slow and media performance poor

– Also afraid of pushback from end users

Concerns about internal buy-in from IT staff remain high

Political battles, turf wars within IT still a gating factor, so plan accordingly

Previous experience with other centralized computing models greatly influences

openness to client virtualization, as well as depth of understanding and usage

Target marketing messages at different levels of experience

Focus more efforts on customers with large or well-established virtual user

session deployments

59


Essential Guidance

PC hardware management less of a concern than expected

Most feel they have that under control

Application management or license control management a bigger issue

Limited usage of a single or small set of “golden images” that can be used

across all virtual clients in an organization

More likely to maintain individual images per user

– Reflection of the simplicity of many deployments (and limited

understanding of full potential of solutions)

Develop tiered educational programs that can walk people up to higher

levels of usage sophistication as they become more familiar with the

product

Start low and very simple

60


Essential Guidance

• Tailored approach to prospect/customer engagements…

• Customers using tightly managed rich clients

• Stress ease of use, security, compliance, focus on application as reasons to use desktop virtualization

• Customers using loosely managed rich client

• Stress lower cost, application manageability, data management and configuration control

• Custom Solutions both an opportunity and challenge

• Stress awareness of solutions, time to market, standardization, ease of use, security, compliance and allowing IT organization to focus energies on other business unit priorities.

• For a services based offering, time to market is likely the strongest argument for using a services offering, rather than complexity or lower cost

• Stress findings that majority or organizations implement desktop virtualization in 6 months or longer, and for strategic technology, this is too long.

• As integration with existing rich desktop environment becomes an issue, more complexity should be expected.

61


Appendix – Research Schedule

SMBs and Virtualization

I/O Virtualization Taxonomy

Worldwide System Infrastructure Software 2010 Top 10 Predictions

IDC's Software Taxonomy, 2010

Centralized Virtual Desktops vs Client Hosted Virtual Desktops

Virtual Client Computing: 2010 The Inflection Point

Containers: Niche Solution or General Solution?

Worldwide Virtual Machine Software 2009 Vendor Shares

Centralized Virtual Desktop Competitive Market 2009 Vendor Shares

Worldwide Availability and Clustering Software 2009 Vendor Shares

Application Virtualization Competitive Market 2009 Vendor Shares

Centralized Virtual Desktop Competitive Market 2010-2014 Forecast

Desktop Virtualization Management Software 2010-2014 Forecast* Full research schedule available upon client request


Appendix – Research Schedule

Virtual User Session Software Competitive Market 2009 Vendor Shares

Worldwide Virtual Machine Software 2010-2014 Forecast

Worldwide Availability and Clustering Softwae 2010-2014 Forecast

Virtualization 3.0 Ecosystem Forecast Update

Application Virtualization Competitive Market 2010-2014 Forecast

Virtual User Session Software Competitive Market 2010-2014 Forecast

Worldwide Virtualization Services 2010-2014 Forecast

Infrastructure cloud series - Public clouds

Infrastructure cloud series - SI's

Virtualization and the Impact on Security Models

Infrastructure cloud series - Extending virtualization platforms

Infrastructure cloud series - Hosting providers

Worldwide System Infrastructure Software 2011 Top 10 Predictions

* Full research schedule available upon client request


Brett WaldmanSr. Research Analyst

System Software

(508) 988-6748

[email protected]

Ian SongResearch Analyst

Enterprise Virtualization

Software, Client

(508) 988-6883

[email protected]

Al GillenResearch VP

System Software

(732) 842-4276

[email protected]

Fred BroussardResearch Director,

Enterprise System

Infrastructure Software

(508) 935-4404

[email protected]

Bob O'DonnellVice President

Clients and Displays

(650) 350-6482

[email protected]

Contact

Copyright 2010 IDC. Reproduction is forbidden unless authorized. All rights reserved.

Multi-Client Study

Brett Waldman, Ian Song, Bob O'Donnell, Fred Broussard, Al Gillen

Idc Vcc Mcs 2010 Final

Documents

client environment

microsoft virtual pc

use of virtualization

al gillenclient virtualization

future economic environment

maturity of technologies

range of technologies

agendaoverviewindustry