WHITEPAPER

Recommendations

Info

• Multi-device, multi-platform: The PC is no longer the only tool in end users’ productivity toolboxes. Smartphones and tabletscompany-supplied and user-owned-compete for end-user face time. Not only are there more devices in use—diversity in make and model is the norm. Furthermore, with the galloping trend of bring your own device (BYOD), this diversity is compounding. While seemingly a positive idea—personalization to release end users’ inner creative potential—the operational dark side bubbles up too. From an IT perspective, desktop management and helpdesk duties are creeping upward; yet, efficiency and effectiveness are in a catch-up mode. Security and compliance professionals are equally behind in confidently and comprehensively answering “where is our sensitive data now?” Consequently, a retooling of the PC model is overdue; not only to support the agility and personalization requirements that end users and businesses covet, but also to lessen the burden and expense of lifecycle desktop management, and to fortify security. Portable Desktop and its location Common among alternative personal computing models is the concept of a portable desktop. The portable desktop contains the entire software stack of a traditional physical PC (i.e., operating system, company-selected applications such as Microsoft Office suite, user-selected applications, and user files and configurations). This software-only desktop is portable in the sense that it is not bound to one hardware device. Rather, the portable desktop can be hosted on other compatible hardware devices. The role of the host hardware is to power the portable desktop (electricity and computing resources) and function as the interface to peripherals and communication networks. Operating System pg | # 03
With the desktop portable, improving desktop management and reducing instances and length of end-user productivity disruptions are possible. For example, if the host device is lost or stolen, the portable desktop (provided a back-up exists) is replicated on a replacement host device in less time than provisioning a replacement physical PC. Similarly, if the operating system or application software becomes corrupted, a ‘golden image’ of the corrupted software facilitates rapid recovery. While there are important portability differences across alternative personal computing models (e.g., range of compatible host devices), which will be discussed later, the portable desktop’s location is equally important. By location, meaning two locational dimensions: within the host device, and proximity to the end user. The first, within the host device, refers to whether the portable desktop operates directly on top of the host device’s hardware (native; no hypervisor) or on top of a hypervisor. Additionally, there are two types of hypervisors: Type I hypervisor (also referred to as bare metal), which runs directly on the host device’s hardware, and Type II hypervisor, which runs on top of the host device’s operating system. Exhibit 1 below illustrates the locational differences in relation to the host device’s hardware layer. Exhibit 1: Portable Desktop Locational Differences within the Host Device Portable desktop Host Image Host O/S Portable desktop Hypervisor Host Image Host O/S Portable desktop Hypervisor Hardware Hardware Hardware Source: Frost and Sullivan The ‘within the host device’ implications are: • Performance Degradation: Two performance implications associated with hypervisor-based models are the virtualization and contention caused by multiple active desktops vying for the host device’s hardware resources. In practice, the magnitude and variation in performance degradation are partially controllable through technology and architecture (e.g., optimizing hypervisor operation, and the interplay with the host device’s hardware), and by good desktop management practices in sizing and configuring the host device’s hardware infrastructure based on realistic workload requirements; and then actively monitoring and managing this shared infrastructure. • Security Risk: The host device’s operating system and hypervisor operating below the portable desktop represent reams of security risk. As software, the operating system and the hypervisor are vulnerable to hacker exploits. Additionally, each is potentially outside the direct and continuous control of the issuing agent of the portable desktop (i.e., the IT organization); for example, in a BYOD (user-owned device) circumstance or in a subscribed service instance, such as desktop as a service (third-party environment). Also, similar to other forms of software, the likelihood and severity of a security incident or incidents is unpredictable and changeable over time. Nevertheless, security risk exists and should be evaluated relative to the sensitivity and criticality of the work performed through the portable desktop. As in real estate, location also matters in the portable desktop. Distance between the end user and the location of the hosted portable desktop can negatively impact the end-user experience. Similar to performance-affecting contention of the shared computing resources in ‘within the host device,’ traffic congestion on shared communication networks can also be performance impacting. Technology and management proficiency assist in curbing performance fluctuations and in reducing instances of unacceptability across the network connections between end users and portable desktops. pg | # 04
Page 1 and 2: The Office of the Future Next Gener
Page 3: Personal Computing’s Reincarnatio
Page 7 and 8: Key elements for development of a D
Page 9 and 10: Intelligence • With the increasin
Page 11 and 12: Digital Workplace with the right pa
Page 13 and 14: Use case: effective EUC solutions f
Page 15: Zensar Technologies Zensar is a lea

WHITEPAPER

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?