Managing the desktop estate: the low-risk route to desktop virtualisation

Transcription

1 >> White paper Managing the desktop estate: the low-risk route to desktop virtualisation July 2010 How the high capital cost and potential disruption of desktop virtualisation can be overcome, bringing all the advantages of DV to even the smallest desktop estates.

2 Contents Executive summary p 3 Managing the desktop estate - expensive and time consuming p 3 The promise of desktop virtualisation p 5 Obstacles to desktop virtualisation p 7 Price of entry p 9 Desktop virtualisation without the up-front expense a new approach p 10 Conclusion p 12 About the sponsor, Double-Take Software p 14 This document is property of Incisive Media. Reproduction and distribution of this publication in any form without prior written permission is forbidden. 2 Computing I white paper l sponsored by Double-Take Software

3 Executive summary Desktop virtualisation (DV) promises to cut the total cost of ownership (TCO) of the desktop estate while increasing manageability and security and easing the support burden. However, when considering conventional DV systems, many organisations view the price of entry both financially and in terms of working culture as too high. In a recent Computing survey, 77 percent of respondents who said their companies will never virtualise their desktops indicated that the biggest obstacle is the requirement for refreshing hardware, software or infrastructure, and 54 percent cited up-front capital expenditure (CapEx). The working patterns of users, the prevailing culture in the IT department and the need to retrain IT staff with virtualisation skills are also frequent objections to deploying DV, especially among smaller companies which consider the technology beyond their scope. However, high CapEx, sweeping changes to infrastructure and retraining support staff in the technicalities of virtualisation may not be necessary. By deploying centralised desktop images, even desktop estates of as few as ten PCs can benefit from DV without the associated risks and expense. Managing the desktop estate expensive and time consuming Managing a desktop estate, whether it be just ten or thousands of PCs, is time consuming, labour intensive and therefore expensive. Security patches and bug fixes have to be rolled out to each machine, as do any operating system or application updates. And when users run into problems, support staff are required to take remote control or appear desk-side. Consequently, industry analysts such as Gartner have estimated TCO to be around 80 a month per desktop for a company with 2,500 desktop PCs 1. Nearly one-third of respondents to a Computing survey of 104 UK IT decision makers work in organisations with more than 1,000 desktops and individual responses indicate desktop estates in the tens of thousands. Another quarter has estates of between 250 and 1,000 PCs (Fig. 1). 1 Computing l white paper I sponsored by Double-Take Software 3

4 Fig. 1 : How many desktops does your organisation support? Fewer than 10 (9%) (13%) (9%) (8%) (9%) 501-1,000 (13%) More than 1,000 (32%) Don t know (6%) Of course, the ratio of support staff to desktops varies by organisation, but generally speaking the fewer the number of desktops, the smaller the ratio, so organisations with fewer than 1,000 PCs will have a higher desktop TCO by virtue of the number of support staff required (Fig. 2). Fig. 2 : Ratio of desktops to support staff according to the size of the desktop estate 250 Desktops per support staff < ,000 >1,000 No. of desktops 4 Computing I white paper l sponsored by Double-Take Software

5 The promise of desktop virtualisation Desktop virtualisation promises to cut the TCO of the desktop estate while increasing manageability by automated patching and upgrades; beefing up security with centralised data and back up; easing the support burden by imposing uniform desktops; and improving scalability by making it easier to add or subtract new clients. This is borne out by the responses to Computing's survey. When asked to name the three top benefits of DV for their organisations, 57 percent of respondents chose overall greater manageability of the desktop estate, 46 percent said lower TCO and 45 percent cited centralised control. Reducing the support burden, increasing the lifespan of desktop hardware and enforcing IT policy arguably a function of control and manageability all rated highly too (Fig. 3). Fig. 3 : What do you regard as the main benefits of desktop virtualisation for your organisation? Greater manageability of desktop estate (57%) Lower TCO (46%) Centralised control (45%) Enforce user IT policies (34%) Lower support cost/burden (32%) Increased lifespan of desktop hardware (25%) More secure (24%) Lower power consumption (19%) Route to cloud migration (15%) Other (2%) None (2%) * Respondents could select more than one answer As would be expected, these perceived benefits dominate as motivators among those surveyed who are considering DV for their organisations. Again, when asked to choose the top three motives, 52 percent cited reducing TCO, and 49 percent said lowering support costs (Fig. 4). Computing l white paper I sponsored by Double-Take Software 5

6 Fig. 4 : What is the main motivation for desktop virtualisation in your organisation? Greater manageability of desktop estate (57%) Lower support cost (50%) Desktop hardware refresh (36%) Infrastructure refresh/overhaul (25%) Operating system migration (23%) Application migration (21%) Other (10%) Outsourcing (10%) Eventual migration to cloud (10%) * Respondents could select more than one answer Yet compared to server virtualisation which is prevalent and mature, DV is in its infancy with low levels of uptake. Virtualisation first is now the default approach for new server deployments at most enterprise IT organisations, says Michelle Bailey, research vice president of datacentre trends at industry analyst firm IDC 2. However, Roy Illsley, senior analyst at research company Ovum, estimates that just one percent of more than half a billion business PCs worldwide have been virtualised 3. Indeed, in Computing s survey a whopping 71 percent of respondents have virtualised servers or plan to in the next 12 months, more than double that of those using or planning DV in the same time frame. Only three percent claim to have virtualised all desktops (Fig. 5) Computing I white paper l sponsored by Double-Take Software

7 Fig. 5 : Attitudes to virtualisation a. Have you virtualised, or do you plan to virtualise in the next 12 months? Nothing (19%) Servers (71%) Desktops (31%) Storage (32%) Other (3%) * Respondents could select more than one answer b. Which of the following best describes your position on desktop virtualisation? We would never virtualise our desktops (11%) We are considering desktop virtualisation but with no specific timeframe (59%) All desktops already virtualised (3%) We have virtualised a proportion of desktops (15%) We are planning to begin desktop virtualisation within a defined timeframe (12%) Obstacles to desktop virtualisation Given the promise of DV to reduce desktop TCO and increase manageability, why does DV lag server virtualisation by so much? Glance back to the motivations for DV (Fig. 4) and a possible answer emerges: the third most popular motive for DV at 36 percent is a desktop hardware refresh. Refreshing infrastructure also figures highly at 25 percent. Conventional wisdom says DV comes with a high price tag: the high CapEx required for new servers and thin clients; and a cultural change which requires altering users working patterns and retraining support staff in the technicalities of virtualisation. Computing l white paper I sponsored by Double-Take Software 7

8 Indeed, among both those who are considering DV and those who rule it out altogether, these factors are cited as the main obstacles to its adoption. For 53 percent of those contemplating DV, the prospect of the required hardware, software or infrastructure refresh is the biggest obstacle, followed by up-front CapEx (46%). Incompatibility with the working patterns of users (18%) and the culture of the IT department (15%) also figure (Fig. 6a). For those who have ruled out DV, these same obstacles loom even larger: 77 percent cite hardware, software or infrastructure refresh; 54 percent CapEx; 46 percent incompatibility with the working patterns of users; and 31 percent the IT department culture (Fig. 6b). Fig. 6 : Main obstacles to desktop virtualisation a. Main obstacles to desktop virtualisation in organisations that are considering DV, either now or at some time in the future Upfront capital outlay (46%) Hardware / Software / Infrastructure refresh required (53%) Lack of virtualisation skills for initital implementation/integration (25%) Lack of virtualisation skills for ongoing support (22%) IT department culture (15%) High perceived TCO (14%) Incompatibility with current working patterns of users (18%) Incompatibility with current infrastructure (27%) User resistance (22%) Other (10%) 8 Computing I white paper l sponsored by Double-Take Software

9 Fig. 6 : continued b. Main obstacles to desktop virtualisation in organisations that would never consider DV Upfront capital outlay (54%) Hardware / Software / Infrastructure refresh required (77%) Lack of virtualisation skills for initital implementation/integration (0%) Lack of virtualisation skills for ongoing support (0%) IT department culture (31%) High perceived TCO (8%) Incompatibility with current working patterns of users (46%) Incompatibility with current infrastructure (31%) User resistance (31%) Other (0%) Price of entry * Respondents could select more than one answer The scale of this entry price means DV is perceived as appropriate for only very large or wealthy organisations, or those with an existing high degree of server virtualisation or technically sophisticated infrastructure and the trained support staff to match. For example, in the Computing survey, almost all companies with more than 250 PCs have virtualised a proportion of their servers. Generally, DV deployment or planning is less developed and outright rejection of DV is more prevalent among companies with fewer than 500 PCs (Fig. 7). Yet it is precisely the smaller organisations which have the most to gain from DV in terms of support costs and IT management workload as the ratio of support staff to desktops is at its highest where the desktop estate numbers below 500 machines (see Fig. 2). The higher the ratio of support staff the higher the TCO per desktop. Often these organisations can afford to keep only a small generic technical staff for whom desktop support is a routine distraction from more valuable tasks such as application development. If these organisations could free technical staff from a large slice of their support burden, these people would be more valuable to their employers. Computing l white paper I sponsored by Double-Take Software 9

10 Fig. 7 : Which of the following best describes your position regarding desktop virtualisation? Responses split by those with desktop estates of greater and fewer than 500 machines Will never consider DV 5% 16% Planning DV with no specific timeframe 58% 61% Planning DV within a specific timeframe 12% 13% Proportion of desktops virtualised already 7% 22% All desktops virtualised 3% 2% >500 machines <500 machines Desktop virtualisation without the up-front expense a new approach However, there are technologies that can deliver DV without the high price tag, using centralised desktop images stored on a fibre or iscsi SAN from which all PCs boot. This technique affords similar advantages to conventional DV: namely increased manageability, such as automated patching and upgrade; increased security; a lower support burden and consequently a lower TCO for the desktop estate. Proponents of DV using centralised desktop images suggest a TCO of closer to 45 per desktop per month about half that of Gartner s hypothetical typical. Moreover, approaching DV through centralised desktop images overcomes the primary obstacles cited by respondents to Computing s survey. First, there is no requirement to add servers. Any existing Wintel server can be converted to an iscsi SAN to store the images. Nor is there any requirement for new thin clients: existing desktop clients can be used. Second, eliminating the need for additional virtualised infrastructure obviates the requirement to retrain IT staff. Multiple images can be stored on the SAN and deployed for each working group (for example, finance, marketing, R&D, administration, etc) or even for an individual (such as the chief executive). This means users can maintain their normal working patterns, which lowers users resistance to DV. Third, the support burden is lessened considerably: security patches and operating 10 Computing I white paper l sponsored by Double-Take Software

11 system and application upgrades or replacements can be achieved by updating the centralised images rather than each client. These are automatically available to users next time they boot. Furthermore, a remote reboot will solve most issues because the client will be booting from a pristine image on the SAN not a local individual hard drive. Centralised image DV is also highly scalable: new clients can be provisioned simply by directing their network card to the appropriate image on the SAN. Used in conjunction with a suitable nomad architecture means users can sign on at any workstation on the network and receive their personal desktop with their permissions residing as normal in active directory. If the desktop image is stored on a central SAN, there is no longer the requirement for a local hard drive in every client. This enforces centralised backup, improves the reliability of the hardware 4 and can thus extend the lifespan of a PC by three years: from an average four years to seven years. Companies are under increasing pressure from regulations, such as the UK s Carbon Reduction Commitment, customers and other stakeholders to reduce carbon emissions. Eliminating local hard drives will also reduce the power consumption of each desktop estate which can make a significant contribution to emission reduction where the estate runs into large numbers. However, this form of DV is not only suitable for large organisations. Proponents suggest savings can be made by deploying it on a network of as few as ten PCs. 4 MTBF of a PC is directly proportional to that of the hard disc drive. While HDD manufacturers give typical MTBF figures of 500,000 hours for their products, empirical data points to much lower figures Computing l white paper I sponsored by Double-Take Software 11

12 Conclusion Contrary to popular perception, DV does not have to mean high CapEx and sweeping infrastructure and cultural changes. Using centralised desktop images from which clients boot obviates the need for new servers and thin clients the primary obstacles cited by respondents to Computing s survey. This form of DV is suitable for desktop estates numbering multiple thousands of PCs, but is still within the reach of smaller, less sophisticated organisations with as few as ten PCs which can benefit from reduced TCO and increased manageability and security of the desktop estate. Five questions to ask a DV supplier 1. What additional server requirements are there in order to implement the solution? 2. Do I have to roll out new desktops to support the solution? 3. Will I require a traditional fibre or iscsi SAN? 4. Will my desktop support team have to learn new skills in order support the solution? 5. Can the solution handle files of all types, for example large media files? 12 Computing I white paper l sponsored by Double-Take Software

13 Swiss Government has desktops under control The IT Service Centre ISC-FDJP in Bern is the IT service provider for the Federal Department of Justice and Police and specialises in developing and operating sensitive applications for the public sector. ISC operates an international network of systems that supports the Federal Department of Foreign Affairs, the Federal Office for Migration, the Federal Office of Police and the Swiss Federal Customs Administration in more than 200 locations, including embassies, airports, border stations and police stations. For security reasons, an essential requirement is restriction to authorised applications, such as production of passports and ID cards, applications for border control, visa applications etc. Clearly, users should not be able to make any changes whatsoever to the clients, some of which are in public kiosks and must be doubly protected against manipulation. To ensure uniform configuration, ISC in collaboration with Siemens has developed a system with disc-less clients which can be booted only from a central server, using Double-Take Flex from Double-Take Software. Multiple workstations can boot from one central image, residing on an iscsi SAN-based storage system or a NAS. Besides a significant increase in security and the level of control, this also centralises client management and reduces energy consumption. One of the reasons Double-Take Flex was chosen by ISC was the option of booting from two different networks because clients must be able to boot from two different security zones. At each of the locations, Siemens installed a Double-Take Flex server for ISC that manages the boot images for the local clients. In total about 1,000 clients are supported with up to 20 in each location. Most offices deploy a mirrored standby image server that ensures the client systems can be used even if the boot server fails. Besides the live image, there is also a test image that ISC uses to test patches or other modifications to the software. Once testing has been completed, a new boot image is rolled out to the individual locations. As all systems are always booted from a central image, users have no opportunity to change the system configuration permanently; any changes made during operation would be erased at the next boot. So even if a system is compromised by malware, a simple reboot restores it to a pristine image. This centralised management means ISC can support all 200-plus locations with three to five people. Computing l white paper I sponsored by Double-Take Software 13

14 About the sponsor Double-Take Software provides the world's most relied upon solution for accessible and affordable data protection for Microsoft Windows applications. The Double- Take product is the standard in data replication, enabling customers to protect business-critical data that resides throughout their enterprise and delivers unparalleled data protection, centralised back-up, high availability, and recoverability. Double-Take Software s family of products gives you the ability to easily move, backup and protect critical data and applications regardless of platform, environment or geographic location. Whether you need a better way to move workloads for migration, continuously backup workloads and recover them on demand to any physical or virtual machine, ensure the availability of critical workloads or more flexibly manage desktop and server workloads, we have a simple solution that s right for you. Contact Double-Take Software UK Double-Take House 1 Wildwood Triangle Worcester WR5 2QX Telephone: +44 (0) Fax: +44 (0) Visit: 14 Computing I white paper l sponsored by Double-Take Software