How do YOU provide a physical VDI demo?
-
@manxam said in How do YOU provide a physical VDI demo?:
I think you're both conflating the issue: The OP specifically wanted something that didn't LOOK like a computer (my assumption is: "at first glance").
If that's the case, why rule out the things that would best fit that criteria (tablets, tiny machines, etc.?) The parameters of the question don't match that specifically.
-
My assumption is that enough tech people know Wyse from the green screen era and we associate the name with thin computing so that when we see them, even though they just look like small desktops (seriously, compare them to small form factor Dell desktops) we don't "see" them as computers, but as dumb devices even though they are essentially a Chromebook without the branding. But I have a feeling, especially now that the Dell branding is side by side with the Wyse name, that end users that aren't technical will see them identically as normal desktops. It feels like a thin client product name would be seen as a different kind of device, but it is actually our tech knowledge that gives us that impression. Take a kid or someone without tech experience and the Wyse brand is just another random name on a box, they'd have no idea that that is supposed to be something special.
https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/41Ac7A1bZcL.jpg
Try to look at it without the trained eye of an IT pro. To grandma or Ether in accounting or Frank in HR, the Dell desktop and the Wyse thin client look essentially the same. It's just that "Dell computer on my desk."
The OP's goal makes sense. And I agree, the Wyse option might be the best one. But I'm not sure that we can state that it will meet the intended goal of not appearing to be a desktop. As an untrained end user, I think it will be perceived as a full desktop no matter what we do (which, to be fair, is part of the goal of thin clients.)
-
I think that the real challenge being face here, if I read it correctly, is that there is a desire for the hardware used to not confuse the end user into thinking that there is a computer there doing the work. While not having to teach them what remote computing means. And that's a great idea and would be awesome if there was a device that would do that.
But it's my opinion, from a lot of experience around this, that as long as there is a monitor, let alone a box of any sort, the users will just perceive the monitor as the local computing device (heck, that's one of the most popular approaches today for desktop computing) and no matter what you use you are going to have some "'splaining to do" to the end user so that they understand that they are seeing something special.
If anyone has success or experience in actually getting around the need to explain remote computing to the customer, definitely share it. Because I do this all the time and have pretty good luck in explaining it and showing them how we can transform any device whether one that they already have or one that we demo, so that the customer understands what they are seeing. But can't imagine how we could do it in a simpler way without having to show some of the sausage being made to the customer.
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/25/93/4e/25934e78efb9480d585305fbb2a8c482.jpg
-
Well - Scott hit over 3+ posts exactly what I was wondering with one of my earlier posts.
I love the idea of trying to get end users to think that nothing local is happening, removing the need to actually educate them on remote computing - but Apple in the olden days and just about everyone nowadays makes an all in one computer. So just because they don't see a box doesn't mean they won't think the components aren't 'in the monitor'.
Unfortunately I think this goal as restarted by Scott is unobtainable. End user education will be required, assuming their understanding of this functionality is a requirement.
-
@scottalanmiller said in How do YOU provide a physical VDI demo?:
Try to look at it without the trained eye of an IT pro. To grandma or Ether in accounting or Frank in HR, the Dell desktop and the Wyse thin client look essentially the same. It's just that "Dell computer on my desk."
yes, that was my point too.
-
having no personal experience with full VDI, but understanding the basic principles of it, my question is this. Why does the user need to care if the computation is happening locally or remotely? The average PC user in my experience interacts almost exclusively with the keyboard, mouse, and monitor(s). I see the advantages in VDI, but I don't think it would be common for non-tech users to appreciate the reasons why they are assigned a thin client vs a thick. To me, VDI seems like a decision based on business or IT goals, and the experience, if done right, should be transparent to the user anyways.
I think most of us agree that the OP's requirements seem to eliminate virtually all options, based on the way we interpret the definition of the terms. I would go further and ask where this requirement was coming from? This sounds like the client's management throwing a blanket statement out there because there is a fundamental lack of understanding about modern computing and how intermingled everything is today. The lines between thick and thin, PC and magic box can be very fuzzy.
I have a similar situation at work where my management has historically had a flawed understanding of what "the cloud" is, to the point where it has been a forbidden word in some conversations. Explaining to them that we basically already have a private cloud does not seem to matter to them because they don't want to take the time or effort to understand the technology and realize all the ways that it can benefit us. This type of mentality makes it easy to push through bad requirements that either push inappropriate solutions, or reject appropriate solutions, because of buzzwords or something their buddy's uncle told them.
-
@Donahue said in How do YOU provide a physical VDI demo?:
I have a similar situation at work where my management has historically had a flawed understanding of what "the cloud" is, to the point where it has been a forbidden word in some conversations. Explaining to them that we basically already have a private cloud does not seem to matter to them because they don't want to take the time or effort to understand the technology and realize all the ways that it can benefit us. This type of mentality makes it easy to push through bad requirements that either push inappropriate solutions, or reject appropriate solutions, because of buzzwords or something their buddy's uncle told them.
In your case, the handy thing is that there is no time you need to use the term cloud, even if dealing with one, unless someone asks.
But almost nothing you'd have to worry about would come up. Like getting an app hosted, rarely means cloud. If it is cloud, it's not exposed and you don't actually know. Like Office 365 email is only known to be hosted on a cloud because Microsoft tells us that it is, but there is no way to know otherwise and some of their competitors do not.
Cloud computing itself is not something that ever needs to be discussed with management, just like you wouldn't drag them into a pipeline depth versus clock speed discussion on processors. It really shouldn't come up. Now if a manager learns about clock speed and asks, they might inject some random opinion. But in general, if you leave it out, they don't ask you to look into it.
-
@scottalanmiller said in How do YOU provide a physical VDI demo?:
@Donahue said in How do YOU provide a physical VDI demo?:
I have a similar situation at work where my management has historically had a flawed understanding of what "the cloud" is, to the point where it has been a forbidden word in some conversations. Explaining to them that we basically already have a private cloud does not seem to matter to them because they don't want to take the time or effort to understand the technology and realize all the ways that it can benefit us. This type of mentality makes it easy to push through bad requirements that either push inappropriate solutions, or reject appropriate solutions, because of buzzwords or something their buddy's uncle told them.
In your case, the handy thing is that there is no time you need to use the term cloud, even if dealing with one, unless someone asks.
But almost nothing you'd have to worry about would come up. Like getting an app hosted, rarely means cloud. If it is cloud, it's not exposed and you don't actually know. Like Office 365 email is only known to be hosted on a cloud because Microsoft tells us that it is, but there is no way to know otherwise and some of their competitors do not.
Cloud computing itself is not something that ever needs to be discussed with management, just like you wouldn't drag them into a pipeline depth versus clock speed discussion on processors. It really shouldn't come up. Now if a manager learns about clock speed and asks, they might inject some random opinion. But in general, if you leave it out, they don't ask you to look into it.
TL;DR Don't bring up things that aren't important to the conversation.
-
@DustinB3403 exactly, I think most people when dealing with cloud get into trouble by introducing a term that means nothing specific to the people to whom they are speaking, but often produces an emotional reaction.
If working with "cloud computing", refer to it as virtualization if necessary. If working with the "public" nature of a cloud, refer to it as hosting. All of these things are accurate and correct. The term cloud computing means something specific, but it is "loaded jargon" and if your audience doesn't understand the technical jargon, using it creates a random reaction, rather than a logical one.
-
In my case however, I have heard many times in discussions with more than one person, where person A mentions the word 'cloud' and person B says something like "we can never do that", and it was never me bringing it up. I don't generally bring it up, because then I would be forced to break their preconceived notions and likely have a much more detailed and technical conversation than either of us would want.
My point was that the OP is probably getting a uneducated requirement from his client, and there is probably not a good way to meet the requirement that would be universally agreed upon by people who were educated, and probably not even by the non-tech crowd. Instead of trying to work around a arguably nonsensical requirement, I think it may be more beneficial to steer the conversation to the heart of the matter and discover the reason for the requirement. I find this a lot, not just in IT, that people ask for one thing, but really want something else, or think they want something because they don't really understand it. It happens to the best of us.
-
@Donahue said in How do YOU provide a physical VDI demo?:
In my case however, I have heard many times in discussions with more than one person, where person A mentions the word 'cloud' and person B says something like "we can never do that", and it was never me bringing it up.
Yes, but "cloud" means nothing. So there is nothing that they are telling you not to do. And I'm not trying to play semantics, I'm being serious. There is no "cloud" in IT. If you think I'm incorrect, simply ask "Since 'cloud' isn't a specific term and means something different to everyone, what is it that we can't do, as I cannot action 'don't do cloud'" and get their definition. I guarantee it doesn't limit you nearly as much as you would assume.
-
@scottalanmiller no, since we talked about it the last time, I don't feel like this a limitation any more, or at least not nearly to the degree that I used to. I am at the point where If I think we need a solution that I think of as "cloud", or if I think someone else would think of it as "cloud", then I am going to pursue it anyways. I've earned a lot of leverage and my opinion holds a lot of respect within my company now because I have demonstrated that I try and approach everything from a business perspective. A lot of it is just the trust they have in me. So for me personally, I no longer feel burdened by this, but it has been the company's historical position.
