Damn! Cloud computers! Thin Client Selection for Parallels VDI
Summary of the previous series: we, together with colleagues from Virtuozzo (after selling part of the business and Odin brand to Ingram Micro, called the Parallels virtualization division), developed a product for desktop virtualization - Parallels VDI . However, designing and developing the software does not mean getting a complete VDI solution. An equally important element of such systems is access devices, which we will talk about in more detail today.
IBS Thin Client
When we started developing our solution, one of the highest priority requirements was to support hardware thin clients - in the process of centralizing workstations, the last thing I want to do is leave Windows desktops as access devices, because this significantly reduces the effect of the transition to VDI. Here it is worth recalling the main advantage of thin clients - unlike traditional desktops, they do not require on-site service, which reduces operating costs. Since Parallels VDI was originally developed with the expectation of providing a complete set of technologies from one source (virtualization, connection broker, management and client access software), the idea to offer our customers our own client access device seemed to us the most logical.
No sooner said than done. Of course, we did not set ourselves the task of developing and arranging the release of our own thin client, deciding to go along the proven OEM path. First of all, we formulated the basic requirements for the device, without limiting ourselves in the choice of processor architecture. The original version of the requirements was exotic - for example, the option with two memory banks was discussed: read-only for firmware and read-write for drivers, because We initially focused on the security of the solution. Additional criteria for the selection of devices were the cost and comfort of work when connected to a virtual desktop.
We understood that our history was purely local, therefore manufacturers were selected either from Russia or from Southeast Asia. This happened a few years before the imposition of sanctions, but the vector ultimately turned out to be correct.
As a result, we selected a number of devices for testing. The list turned out to be extensive and included devices with different firmware (various versions of Linux, Windows Embedded Standard) and without it at all. Therefore, in order to put them on an equal footing, we developed a kind of test firmware. As a base, they chose Debian OS version 7 with support for a wide range of processor architectures.
Thus, the preparation of the thin client for testing was as follows:
- Creating a backup copy of the factory firmware (if available)
- Installing minimal Debian 7 with XFCE as your desktop environment
- Dependency Installation for Software Client
- Install Parallels VDI Client
Testing itself consisted of evaluating the comfort of working in a virtual desktop. As a “load”, we used the environment with the Aero theme turned on in Windows, as well as the Big Buck Bunny video . Assessing the comfort of work is instrumental - it’s difficult (just watch an excellent video from the Microsoft TechEd event ), so we decided to rely on the amount of subjective ratings of several people. The output was a table with configurations and ratings:
The maximum points from our experts were received by thin clients based on Intel chips and AMD APUs. Here, the difference in work compared to the physical desktop turned out to be minimal, despite the activated Aero theme. As for watching test video, these thin clients were able to handle a stream of RDP traffic of several tens of Mb / s. Although I must admit that the pleasure of such viewing is doubtful (the video was “unclenched” in the virtual desktop, and then the entire pixel change was sent via RDP). When using RemoteFX and multimedia redirectionthe flow dropped to 3-5 Mb / s, and the smoothness of video playback was comparable to running the test file locally. Outsiders of the test were thin clients on the ARM platform. It was relatively comfortable to work on them only after disabling the Aero theme and all the graphic effects.
What did we choose? This is in the next chapter.
Confronting Reality, or Attempt Number 2
In testing our damn dozen thin clients, it became apparent that the original starting point was not entirely correct. It is not enough to choose any hardware platform, because this will be followed by the creation of firmware, its support, the release of updates and the development of a system of restrictions for the user - in a word, the invention of a bicycle. This requires additional staff, investment, infrastructure. Moreover, the matter is not limited to one firmware: a fleet of devices is needed to manage the device fleet, otherwise their maintenance will not be easier than the maintenance of ordinary desktops. It became obvious to us that Parallels VDI didn’t need a hardware platform, but a complete solution from a manufacturer that specializes in this. Nevertheless, we completed the testing,
So, we started the selection of potential partners and devices again, approaching this process with an updated list of requirements:
- The thin client must be running Windows Embedded Standard (WES) or Linux based on Debian 7 / Ubuntu 12.04 and later (the Parallels VDI software client currently only supports this distribution branch)
- The manufacturer should have a centralized fleet management system for thin clients
- The software client must work on the factory firmware of the device.
The second stage of the selection of access devices coincided with the introduction of sanctions, which greatly complicated the process. Nevertheless, we did not cut off the possibility of working with foreign manufacturers, which paid off, but more on that later.
Of the above criteria, paragraph 3 was the most important. Communicating with manufacturers who were ready for closer cooperation, we came to two options for resolving the issue of Parallels VDI client working on factory firmware.
We managed to agree with domestic manufacturers on integrating our client directly into the factory firmware. Fortunately, almost all of these manufacturers build their firmware on the basis of the Debian OS or its derivatives, so installing the client in the basic firmware is a technical matter. With foreign manufacturers, we settled on the option to centrally install the Parallels VDI client using a thin client management system.
If everything is clear with the Parallels VDI client integrated into the firmware, then the second method is worth a closer look.
Let's start with the Windows Embedded Standard device as the easiest option. Of the requirements, our client only has .Net 4, which is usually preinstalled, so the optimal algorithm looks like this:
- Place the Parallels VDI client installation package on a file or FTP server (depending on the management system)
- Using the control system, create a task for downloading and installing the client on thin clients in automatic mode
- Define a list of devices and send them a task.
The size of the installation package is only 9 MB, so the simultaneous installation even on a large number of devices is not difficult.
If we talk about thin clients on Linux, then I had to go a different way, because before installing the Parallels VDI client, you need to install an impressive list of dependencies. Since this procedure, in turn, requires Internet access, which is far from always possible, the optimal solution found by us is as follows:
- Get root access to the thin client
- Provide device access to the Internet
- Install All Required Dependencies and Parallels VDI Client
- Take an image from the resulting reference device
- Using the control system, create a task that will deploy the prepared image to the selected devices.
Yes, it’s a little more complicated than with Windows, but you can do something different for the sake of creating a closed environment and meeting information security requirements.
Device list
So, we have come to the answer to the main question - which thin clients are Parallels VDI compatible with.
Firstly, these are any thin clients based on Windows Embedded Standard 7/8. Almost every manufacturer of such devices has versions on Windows, and here we are in no way limiting the choice.
Secondly, the following is a list of those devices that we have tested and are ready to recommend:
Total
We have done significant work to solve the problem of choosing access devices for Parallels VDI. Currently, we can confidently recommend at least 13 devices we tested. But it is not necessary to be limited only to them - there are much more suitable thin clients, considering compatibility with any devices on the Windows Embedded Standard. We believe that now any customer will be able to choose a thin client in accordance with their requirements:
- InfoTeCS and OKB CAD - for those who need certified solutions to ensure information security and comply with regulatory requirements
- DEPO and TONK - for those who value the budget in rubles and who want to avoid possible sanctions risks
- Samsung and HP - for those who are not ready to compromise and are used to using only solutions that have proven themselves in the global market
- On Intel / AMD chips - for those who need a universal device for a wide range of tasks
- On ARM chips - for those who need to work with 1-2 applications and fit into a limited budget
Thanks for attention!
PS If we are read by any of the reputable manufacturers, then we are open to cooperation to expand the list of supported thin clients.
