We’re often asked (by customers and sales people) how the different VDI Connection Brokers compare to eachother. One of my colleagues (Ken Davidson) & I have created a Connection Broker Comparison Document that attempts to provide an honest comparison of VMware View 3.0, XenDesktop 3.0 and Quest vWorkspace 6.0. We’re interested in feedback from the community to make sure that we’re accurately portraying the feature set of our competitors, so please let us know if there are corrections to be made. We also know that there are many other connection brokers on the market, and new ones seem to pop-up every couple of months. Others of note are Leostream, 2X, Ericom, Qumranet, Panologic, [insert any number of other vendors here]… Our document was created to compare Quest vs the competition, as defined by the customers we visit. If I start getting lots of requests for information on another vendor, I’ll consider expanding the document.
Download the Virtual Desktop Infrastructure (VDI) Connection Broker Comparison here: Quest Connection Broker Comparison
This document was updated in March 2009 to reflect the features of VMware View 3.0, Quest vWorkspace 6.0 (previously known as Provision Networks Virtual Access Suite) and XenDesktop 3.0.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
May 26th, 2008 at 3:05 pm
[...] Quest Software compares Connection Brokers (Provision, VMware, Cirix) May 26, 2008 Posted by channelvirtualization in Uncategorized. Tags: VDM2, Virtual Access Suite, XenDesktop trackback Patrick Rouse at Provision Networks (part of Quest) has created a connection broker comparison. Indeed, they have compared their product against VMware VDM2 and Citrix XenDesktop. The report and comments can be found here. [...]
May 31st, 2008 at 6:33 pm
Virtualization Short Take #9…
More links and commentary from the virtualization world!…
June 8th, 2008 at 8:34 pm
I have updated the document to reflect the features of VDM 2.1 and Provision Networks Virtual Access Suite 5.10.
June 20th, 2008 at 1:47 pm
Any plans to add Leostream to the comparison?
March 31st, 2009 at 3:30 pm
[...] auteurs zijn dus duidelijk niet onpartijdig, maar vragen wel feedback van de community om de vergelijking waar mogelijk objectiever te [...]
March 31st, 2009 at 8:08 pm
Is this a joke? The items selected in the comparison are cherry picked to make Quest Look good. .MSI distribution? Brokers are now ESD systems? No mention App Virtualization and streaming? The comparison is very self-serving.
Joe
March 31st, 2009 at 8:27 pm
Joe, if you have constructive criticism we’re happy to update the document with missing features. That being said all you did was blast hard work that no matter who did it could never be 100 percent accurate. This document has been updated many times based on feedback. All you offered is remove a Quest feature and add a missing competitor feature without specifying which product you’re referring to.
VWorkspace is not just a connection broker, and is not marketed as such. It is marketed as an enterprise terminal services, virtual and physical desktop management solution. Forgive us for pointing out the many management consoles and separate products marketed as single solutions by our competitors.
Like I said, tell us exactly what’s missing to make it unbiased and we’ll publish it, but don’t ask us to remove our features.
April 1st, 2009 at 12:24 pm
[...] Compare vWorkspace to VMWare View3 and XenDesktop 3 [...]
April 2nd, 2009 at 12:31 pm
Patrick,
I overreacted and was out of line. For that, apologize. I have a tremendous amount of respect for you and for Quest. Personally, I would like to see Quest and vWorkspace be successful. I’ll probably get a lot of crap from the Citrix guys for saying that, but I don’t care. I know you put a lot of time and effort in putting together this document, but I do take issue on some of the items presented, items not presented, and how some items are grouped together. To be fair, I will compile a list for you.
Joe
April 2nd, 2009 at 3:29 pm
Single Management Console – Most decision makers don’t care how many console are used. I posed this question to a couple decision makers yesterday and the results were all the same. Even if a product has a single console, an administrator will undoubtedly need to multiple consoles. So there is a single console for vWorkspace, but the sysadmin will, at some point in time, open up AD&U, SQL Console, HyperVisor’s management console and console for any other tools and add-ons.
Organize by Location – I do not understand what this is. Needs clarification
Disable Desktop - Right click option
Disable Managed Desktop Group - Right click option
Are we comparing context menus now? In XenDesktop, you can disable a Management Group and/or an Individual desktop. And YES you can disable both the context menu (right click option)
Filter and Sort VM – VM are grouped and viewed by management group and can be sorted by columns within. The can also be filtered and sorted within XenServer as well. So this should be a Yes for XenDesktop
Management Console includes Sysprep Customization - Not need for XenDesktop as PVS provides and manages the domain accounts. Perhaps a note stating, Accounts managed by PVS.
Push MSI Packages to VMs – Too specific of a technology. Should be change to How Applications are delivered/deployed to the Desktop with multiple items being selectable. Some sample ideas.
Built in .MSI distribution
Application Virtualization and Streaming (VDM and XenDesktop customers have this option)
Session-based
Single Image Deployment methodology
Third-party ESD
Publish/Unpublish Multiple Applications In one Task - Same idea as the single console thing. It’s annoying for Admins, but the decision makers simply do care if it takes one step or two.
Restrict access to VMs by Day of Week & Time of Day – Can be accomplished via Access Gatewat
Method of desktop assignment/entitlement: - - -
Active Directory Group - Pools can be assigned by groups in XenDesktop
Supports Expand Networks QoS/Compression Appliances – Irrelevant for comparison. So what? XenDesktop supports WanScaler but there is not mention of this. Expand Networks supports both ICA and RDP and has done so for a very long time.
Universal Printer Supports EMF and PDF – Two items listed as one. XenDesktop does support EMF redirection.
Desktop User Assignment can be changed after assignment - Not correct, User assigned can be changed after assignment. This is a yes for XenDesktop
Dynamic Auto-Expansion of Managed Desktop Group
Dynamic Auto-Creation of VMs
Set Min/Max Number of Desktops per Managed Desktop
Group
These three items are same thing with last item being a control mechanism. Should be reword as 1 item.
Cross-Group Desktop Naming Convention – This doesn’t make sense.
Connect users to Seamless Applications on XP Pro, Vista
VMs, or Physical PCs - Two items here. One is the ability access published applications (session based for example) which XenDesktop can do. The other item refers to reverse published applications which XenDesktop cannot do yet.
VDI Creation/Deletion of associated AD Computer Objects – Partially Incorrect. XenDesktop can create the AD objects but delete them.
VDI AD Object Creation in any OU via GUI Sysprep Editor – Not required for XenDesktop – Done via PVS
VDI Batch VM Creation – Incorrect. XenDesktop absolutely do this.
VDI Batch VM Creation across multiple ESX Resource Pools
VDI Batch VM Creation across multiple ESX Data Stores
Way, way too specific… Why not also add the batch creation across multiple XenServer pools too?
Broker Verifies free sufficient space exists on Data Store
before creating VMs – This a DBA issue
Power Manage Physical PCs
Task Automation for Power Management & OS State
Task Automation to Logoff or Reset Sessions
Task Automation for MSI Package Deployment
Task Automation for VM Deletion
Task Automation to Copy Files, Run Script or Program on
Desktop
You do realize this all of this can be done with Workflow Studio, which comes with XenDesktop
Server Provisioning, i.e. Broker, TS, DB… - Infrastructure roles and generally one time install. XenDesktop is an easy install, and it also installs all the pre-reqs too. So, I’m not sure what your getting at with this one.
Linux PXE Boot – PVS supports Linux.
Wyse Thin OS Client
Multiple Wyse Thin OS Desktops per user
Third-party vendor support – not relevant in this comparison unless you want to include every thin-client vendor out there.
SSL Reverse Proxy / Gateway – Incorrect. An AG application not required. It is recommended. CSG works with XenDesktop. We demoed this yesterday.
Now the next line items should be –
Hardened network application for secure remote access – This is a big deal in large orgs
End-point checking and analysis –
Second Factor Authentication
Other random thoughts, but not everything.
Workflow automation tool
Click to call integration – (I believe someone added send PDF to email client as a feature)
Remote desktop support - ability for help desktop troubleshoot client access device remotely
Session reliability
Smooth Roaming
Users can restart their machines if unable to connect to them
Smart-card support
Can the vendor provide an end-to-end solution
How many different vendors will the org need to deal with
Application virtualization solution
Application virtualization solution support streaming
Compliance and regulatory issues
Ability to resize windows and switch between full screen and windowed
What type of customer support is available
April 2nd, 2009 at 4:44 pm
Joe, thanks for the feedback. This is very helpful and I will forward it to the people that now maintain this document so it can be updated appropriately. Cheers.