Trigence Blog

Hey.....this makes sense!

2008-01-16T11:18:00.000-08:00

The VmWare decision to buy Thinstall makes sense. VmWare has been semi-public about their recognition that hypervisor technology is not going to be a long term solution for desktop applications and their VDI. They see the Trigence technology as clouding the virtualization landscape. This is due to our ability to support server applications. Even more so problematic for VmWare is the ability to define a network identity for server applications (IP address, hostname, MAC, system ID) in what Trigence calls a capsule. A highly self-contained server application in a virtual environment, particularly with a discrete network identity, looks too much like what VmWare calls an application payload. The fact that both approaches offer similar value propositions is too much. I've had this conversation with one of the VmWare CTOs.

That said, the Thinstall product does seem to be a solid solution for the Windows desktop, however, the Trigence offering differs in several critical ways:

1) Support of server applications on not only Windows but also Linux & Unix

2) Shared virtual environments; the ability for applications in one virtualized environment to correctly access the persistent state in another virtual environment (shared capsules solving what Softgrid calls the context problem)

3) Far more comprehensive encapsulation; mechanisms for placing an application in a virtual environment allow you to encapsulate applications on existing servers, new applications and learned applications. Thinstall offers one mechanism based on multiple snapshots of a system, starting with a "clean" system.

Now, call me naive, but I'm surprised at the level of apparent intimidation caused by an extension of virtualization technology. VmWare and other vendors of hypervisor technology, but VmWare in particular, have the opportunity to extend their capability by allowing encapsulated applications to execute directly on their hypervisor; ESX server. This provides significant flexibility and places VmWare in a very different place in the market. They would have the opportunity of providing a platform that hosts applications with and without an existing commercial OS.

Interesting dynamics.

Application Virtualization is Confusing – But It Shouldn’t Be

2007-12-19T13:22:00.000-08:00

Tennis elbow is one of those medical garbage terms that could mean any of ten or more diagnosis – just knowing that someone has tennis elbow is not enough to really know what is wrong with their arm. Virtualization is quickly becoming this way as many vendors are running to jump on to the trendy ‘virtualization’ bandwagon and calling anything they can some form of the solution. For example, some with application streaming solutions call their products Application Virtualization, which, at first glance, may seem reasonable – users are able to stream applications over the network to client computer, without the need to actually install the application on the client computer. However, just avoiding install is not necessarily a good definition for Application Virtualization – it misses much of the revolutionary change that Application Virtualization brings to how we manage applications. Under this definition, clients and server technology would be a part of Application Virtualization. The thing is, the application is really not running on the resources of the client computer – the product is more aptly named server-based computing, and while server-based computing bring some of the same advantages that Application Virtualization does, it misses on most of the important pieces. You still have to install the application on the server, and you still have to manage the application dependencies and conflicts and versioning on that server the same as you would if the application was installed on the desktop. Server-based computing does not change the way the application works with the underlying OS or platform.

Bottom line - Streaming does not make Application Virtualization.

So how is true Application Virtualization different?

Application Virtualization is a paradigm shift. Applications are freed from dependencies on the infrastructure, and the infrastructure is freed from dependencies on the applications. One standard platform can be a reality in the datacenter (significant reduction in management complexity), and one golden application configuration is possible for the application group (no more need to reconfigure application for different platforms or as patches and new OS’s must be used).

Let’s all agree on what our technical terms mean – it will simplify everything. In an effort to end the confusion, Trigence has started a glossary of industry terms. Check it out at http://trigence.com/glossary/.

A (Semi) Complete Idiot's Guide to...The Green Datacenter

2007-12-10T12:39:00.000-08:00

Green is definitely in fashion these days, at least in the sense of IT world infrastructure, where it seems as if there is a new “green initiative” announcement daily. But when it comes to virtualization, the ‘green’ theme usually comes in reference to consolidation -- being able to reduce the total size of the infrastructure. To be fair, virtualization is not necessarily reducing the infrastructure footprint, that fact that servers and other hardware today can do exponentially more in a significantly smaller package is really the firststep in going green. Virtualization is the all mighty enabler, making it possible to move applications from old or under-utilized servers onto bigger and usually smaller new servers. The result, what would have needed a full row of infrastructure just a few years ago can often now be from a single stack (in fact, IBM has even made a commercial about that).

So how does virtualization make things greener? Well, with less infrastructure, you take up less space and often times going green = more green in the ol’ wallet. In general terms, with less infrastructure, you are cooling and powering less, which directly translates into significant cost savings , as well as less resources indirectly used from the environment Virtualization is the technology that makes this consolidation practically possible – you can easily migrate what you have now into a more compact (and greener) datacenter infrastructure.

Sohat kind of virtualization are we talking about? Great question. Many people would automatically assume Virtual Machines and the like from VMware. While certainly the most popular, don’t be fooled into thinking that Virtual Machines are the answer. Sure, they have their place, but there are some other factors to consider, namely – the people factor (i.e. the management equation). When I virtualize 500 servers so I can migrate the applications and services down to 50 servers, I have certainly reduced my space, power, and cooling requirements, but, I have increased my management equation, now managing 500 virtual machines (same OS maintenance and management overhead as 500 actual servers) plus 50 new servers.

500 + 50 = 550 servers that now need management.

There is a better way. Using another flavor of virtualization – Application Virtualization – you can largely accomplish the same kind of server consolidation, without spawning Virtual Machines that require management. No more proliferation of OS patches or the requirement to maintain hundreds of OS personalities just for application dependencies. In fact, with Application Virtualization, you have the ability to actually standardize your infrastructure platforms. Using the example above, that means 500 servers consolidated and migrated down to 50 new servers will reduce your infrastructure management effort by a factor of ten – and you can take that to the bank (literally).

Now get out there and save the world!

Change my infrastructure? Thanks, but no thanks….

2007-11-14T14:57:00.000-08:00

Thinstall’s recent announcement with Macrovision (see here) reflects an important trend in the market – that you don’t have to get locked into a proprietary infrastructure to support a virtualization solution. In the case of both Microsoft and Citrix, application virtualization is only available when you have their large infrastructures and client applications installed and working. If this is not your current infrastructure, not only are you buying an application virtualization solution, but you are migrating to a new infrastructure -- just to make it work.

Thinstall’s partnership with Macrovision points to the voice of the market starting to speak – we do not want to change out our infrastructure just to take advantage of a virtual environment. Application virtualization solutions should not require an infrastructure change out. Thinstall is not unique in its ability to deliver an open application virtualization solution that works with an existing infrastructure – Trigence has been doing this for years. Though some of the larger vendors in the space will proclaim loudly how their complete solution will encapsulate, distribute, and manage applications, In fact, at Trigence, we take this ‘any way you like it’ approach even farther. First, why stop at the Windows desktop? Isn’t application virtualization just as valuable in the datacenter and on other platforms, such as Linux and UNIX? Trigence offers hardened solutions for the datacenter as well as the desktop. Second, applications are only becoming more complex and dependent on other services and even other applications. Only Trigence offers a truly open application virtualization solution that allows you to take control of defining which services and applications are available and shared between application capsules. Sometimes referred to as the ‘context issue’, Trigence’s “capsule sharing” technology brings deployment and management flexibility that simply cannot be found anywhere else – and that, at the end of the day, is precisely the ‘any way you like it’ response the market is crying for.

I want it to work, and I want it to work now!

2007-10-16T07:10:00.001-07:00

I just read this article from ChannelWeb, and it really got me thinking….Virtualization of the desktop is nothing new!

Remember when everyone, including Oracle, was on the thin client band wagon, even having their own appliances?

Although thin client appliances still exist today, they never replaced the desktop. Appliances, VDI, Citrix and application virtualization all have their place, but there is no “one size fits all” solution. In fact, they complement each other. Some organizations already use appliances to access Citrix which runs on a virtual machine, on virtual storage and use virtual applications.

From a managed services perspective SMBs may buy into VDI however adoption may be slow and somewhat limited. Cost savings for any environment would be minimal since you are actually shifting costs from the desktop to the server and backend infrastructure environment. Issues are now shifted from your desktop to your server or “virtual desktop”. And, VDI has the same problems as the desktop with application conflicts, deployment and manageability. The biggest benefit of thin client technology including VDI is quicker time to market.

Throw in application virtualization and you now have on-demand applications that actually work!

A Brave New (virtualized) World -- Cost Savings

2007-10-05T08:22:00.000-07:00

What is the appeal of virtualization in IT today? Many enterprise business cases have been built around cost savings, and the analysts have fallen suit as well (one of the latest reports on virtualization cost savings recently coming out from Butler, noted in this article). Certainly the analysis looks compelling, but is the bigger opportunity being missed?

To date, most business case analysis in virtualization have been centered on virtual machines – that is only one aspect of virtualization, and cost savings with virtual machines is really focused on hardware savings. The general idea that I can take three under-utilized hardware servers and replace them with one larger hardware server running three or four virtual machine images does have merit – the cost of one larger server is usually less than three smaller servers, plus – and this was one of the main features that Butler pointed out – companies can save on space, energy, and cooling (which are especially critical where these resources are very scarce).

Is that the end of the story? Hardly.

In fact, you may have shifted some of your costs over to other areas. How is that possible? To start, you have not reduced software costs at all – in fact, you have probably increased OS license cost to boot. It is all too common to hear the tales of virtual machine sprawl – “I used to manage 200 hardware servers, and now I manage 500 virtual servers”. Ask yourself this question, how much easier is it to manage a virtual server compared to a hardware server? They each have an OS that needs patching and maintenance and even application testing and regression. The thing is, in heavily virtualized environments, there are typically more servers now to manage than there were before – this is an example of shifting hardware costs to software and human costs.

Machine virtualization has its place, to be sure, but there is another solution that prevents cost shifting and can even significantly reduce software and human costs – application virtualization. The genius in application virtualization is its capability to liberate the application from the infrastructure (or to liberate the infrastructure from the application, whichever way you prefer). This paradigm shift allows applications to be encapsulated with all of their dependencies, separate from any changes in the UOS made by the OS or even other applications. In the case of three smaller servers being consolidated into one larger server, application virtualization gives the control needed so that all of the applications from the smaller servers can be run on the one larger server, all sharing one OS. All of the environmental concerns and savings (space, energy, and cooling) have been addressed exactly the same as with virtual machines. However, server management and licenses have been significantly reduced and simplified – managing three servers has changed to managing one server. Plus, having all of the application dependencies encapsulated with the application, the application lifecycle and the infrastructure lifecycle have been simplified (little to no regression testing, much less maintenance) and now completely separate. This revolution is the real brave new world we are looking for.

JeOS – How much OS is needed?

2007-09-25T12:12:00.001-07:00

Earlier this month, VMware announced JeOS, or just enough OS, at VMWorld. Targeted at managing applications, this solution is poised to be an improvement on the virtual appliance approach. It’s interesting to see that VMware recognizes the need to limit OS content in order to manage and deploy applications.

It’s starting to become clear in many enterprise data centers that bundling an entire OS into a virtual image in order to deploy and use an application is not an optimal solution. Organizations have been including a kernel in a virtual image because there has been no option. However, when given a choice these same organizations are starting to realize that managing the application itself as a distinct object is preferable in most use case scenarios. Not only are VMware, Microsoft, Sun and the rest of the “big guys” looking at what this means, there are a number of start-ups targeting the definition and delivery of an application.

It’s funny to see how these things evolve. Who wants to boot another OS in order to access a specific application? You already have an OS running….it’s your desktop. Why would you boot another OS if there is an alternative? The VmWare strategy in particular is starting to unfold; as they are ready, willing and able to admit that something different is needed for desktop applications. That said, the universe of server applications continues to be intertwined with an OS and a hypervisor.

But why?

If separating desktop applications from their dependencies on an OS is a good approach, why is it not also a good approach for server applications? Application independence is certainly more effective than hypervisors and multiple kernels. There is less overhead, applications are more deterministic, they are easier to manage as a discrete object; independent of an OS. Ask any financial services company how you deploy a trading application in a virtual machine. The answer? You don’t; not in production.

Why is it difficult for the system and virtualization vendors to accept that if OS independence for a desktop application is a good thing, it’s also a good thing for a server app? Why is Sun focused solely on migration of existing applications into zones on Solaris 10, without any application specifics? Why has Microsoft stated publicly that they will not virtualize server applications? Because it’s difficult? It’s different; a virtualized server application, particularly one that includes an IP address, hostname &/or MAC address, blurs the lines of what we understand as virtualization categories. It forces us to understand in detail how applications interact with the underlying OS.

It’s not just about the technology; there is also a real vested interest in protecting what you have. None of the aforementioned “big guys” wants to see the OS defocused while the focus is placed on the application itself, highly independent of an OS. It’s simply more complex to virtualize an N-tier application and/or an Oracle database, or Sybase with a dependency on Veritas volume manager than it is to virtualize MS Word and/or PowerPoint.

I know this first-hand; from within the trenches. It’s taken us a long time to get it right. Server applications are dependent on the same things a desktop application is dependent upon. But, a server application may also be dependent upon a network identity, it is likely to be licensed to a specific platform and number of CPUs, it is most certainly very sensitive to network throughput and performance. Creating the environment where multiple Oracle databases can effectively co-exist on the same OS, the same kernel, is not for the faint of heart. It’s not the same as Word, PowerPoint, Excel and Acrobat reader.

We all know that the simple design is most often the most effective design. An application that is abstracted from the OS, one that has its dependencies self contained within an application object, is far less complex than deploying multiple kernels on the same platform in order to deploy applications. But, here’s the problem; in order to deliver such a solution you have to understand what the application is doing. It can’t be about the OS where such a solution is concerned. And that is just simply scary to some organizations that have a vested interest in focusing on the OS.

Virtualization and Security: Friends or Foes?

2007-08-28T06:02:00.000-07:00

Computerworld’s article on security in a virtualized enterprise raises a great point: managing multiple OSs, and therefore more data, on a single platform is quite complex. More operating systems, more data, more complexities … more security risks. However, application virtualization does not require multiple OSs on a single platform. More isn’t always better.

The security experts noted in the article concluded that each virtual machine must be treated separately from each other. But addressing each virtual machine independently greatly diminishes the value of virtualization. Why do we constantly try to make things more complex than needed? Enterprises need to better determine when they want, or more importantly need, to manage multiple OSs - most situations do not warrant hosting multiple OSs on a single platform.

By allowing security teams to focus on managing a single OS, independent of the application, best-practice application virtualization initiatives minimize security risks and effort.

“Everyone is virtualizing the wrong thing!”

2007-08-20T12:47:00.000-07:00

Last week I received a call form an IT executive in the financial space, franticly telling me of his 3am epiphany the night before, waking mid-sleep thinking to himself, “Everyone is virtualizing the wrong thing!”

He was adamant that we get together.

“Physical & OS Virtualization still do not give me control over my applications,” he realized, “What I really want is to create separation so I can run a low cost standardized infrastructure and run my applications in an on-demand fashion without thinking about the infrastructure, VM applications are just too bound to virtual infrastructure with all of the configuration management burdens of physical application installations. Application virtualization really seems like what has been the missing link preventing all of us from achieving a true on-demand enterprise for all of our applications.”

In all fairness, I should also note that he does believe that the physical and OS Virtualization train has left the station and isn’t going to derail anytime soon. In its wake, however, it has left an interesting issue, a lack of freedom from its virtual infrastructure, as he mentioned. This is where Application Capsules inside VM’s just make sense, as application virtualization can deliver independence to their customers across VM types, and cut down the pain created by the VM sprawl.

Our conversation reinforces that virtualizing the hardware and OS only creates one big management mess, or as my IT friend put it “Physical and OS virtualization just shift the mess, they don’t systematically solve anything.” Just look at some of the latest news in the virtualization space – aside from VMware launching the largest tech IPO since Google, Citrix acquired XenSource for $500 million, creating some great industry excitement. The Citrix news, specifically, shows how vendors are trying to address customers’ hunger to optimize their world, drive costs down and increase SLA delivery.

The first wave of virtualization has succeeded in maximizing the value of hardware investments however the most significant business value, which is largely untapped, comes from raising virtualization to the application level. Get ready for the next high tide.

Kernels: Too Much of a Good Thing?

2007-08-15T09:50:00.001-07:00

Peter Glaskowsky's recent Cnet blogsuggests that the concept of anapplication as a self-contained object has the potential to change thesoftware industry, something we strongly believe in. He notes thatvirtual appliances have the potential to change the way we controlapplications, because the application becomes a self-contained objectthat performs a specific purpose.

An application as a self-contained object is an extremely powerful
concept, but virtual appliances include the entire OS with the app. An
inherent requirement by VmWare and any virtual machine, including
virtual appliances, is the use of multiple kernels simultaneously.

Running multiple kernels on one platform is extremely complex and
creates extensive issues - the overhead involved is huge. Meanwhile,
industry giants and start-ups alike are investing tens of millions of
dollars to try to deliver solutions to address the issues caused by
running multiple kernels on one platform. The industry needs to stop
throwing money at the kernel problem.

Kernels are great, but sometimes one is enough. While there are times
when multiple kernels are needed such as when crossing OS boundaries
(i.e. a Windows app on Linux or Solaris) - even those limitations will
soon change. When using a self-contained application image, there is no
need for multiple kernels.

The focus should be on running multiple applications on the same kernel.
Application virtualization provides the same benefits of a virtual
appliance without the need to run multiple kernels; apps execute using
the same kernel.

Nobody wakes up thinking, “Hey, I sure could go for some virtualization today.”

2007-08-13T14:06:00.000-07:00

In the enterprise it’s still all about the money -- reducing spend and increasing revenue. Physical & OS virtualization vendors have been very active with helping IT shops reduce their spending by consolidating hardware. When solving one problem typically new problems arise or old ones get worse and in this case lifecycle management costs have only increased. Therefore, application virtualization enters into the picture to de-couple your applications (new and old alike) from your OS & hardware infrastructure. This enables an enterprise to finally accelerate full standardization so that the infrastructure teams can more efficiently standardize their world & keep up with important changes (such as security threat patches) without affecting any of the applications that can run as independent manageable objects.

Now let’s cut through the application virtualization noise. “Application” in its own right is a big word that means different things to different people. At the end of the day it is in the customers benefit to look at this as broadly as possible since we now live in the age of services where applications are componentized so that the user gets the ultimate benefit --gaining the access to the functionality that they need when and where they need it.

The majority of vendors have been approaching desktop application virtualization by addressing the pain that exists with applications sprawled out on every personal computer. This is where the cost of deployment, patching and supporting each desktop has a very measurable pain. The data center server team has an advantage over the desktop team in that their machines can not be directly touched by the everyday users but they still deal with the cost of deployment/redeployment, patching/updating and monitoring, 99.99% availability, audit and compliance as well as ensuring the applications meet or exceed the services that the business requires to grow. In most industries if applications could be pro-actively controlled, millions of dollars could be added to the bottom-line with order fulfillment, higher customer service level achievement and a greater degree of company resource utilization.

In the enterprise solving deployment challenges around MS Windows Desktop applications is only one small part of the application scope. The world that delivers the greatest upside of not only lowered costs but most importantly line of business alignment is when all parts of all applications become discrete objects where the realization of on-demand computing can become a reality without starting from scratch and spending over 100 man years to get there.

In recent articles there have been firms trying to measure the impact of this industry segment. Now think to yourself where do application and application components run today? From the largest mainframes, mini-computers, blade servers, desktops, laptops, ATM machines, smart phones, DVR’s, gaming systems and embedded environments such as in cars and planes. Gaining control of applications on every level with application virtualization is clearly a multi-billion dollar market because that’s how widespread applications are. This is bigger than Windows or Linux because applications run in more than any one operating system. As one CTO said to me, “applications are not homogeneous we need something to enter the picture to decouple the application so that we can finally be as responsive to our business units as we owe it to them to be”.

It’s about time that the application gets to come first and the control gets handed back to all of us.

5 years from now...

2007-07-31T08:47:00.000-07:00

I noticed an interesting posting on Jody Gilbert’s TechRepublic blog. It’s a list of the 10 tech skills you should develop in the next five years. It’s a compelling list. A couple things come to mind; first, 5 years is a long time in technology terms these days and second, virtualization is not well understood.

Virtualization is number eight on the list, probably a good place for it. The thing that strikes me is that the description defines that you will want to become proficient with the use of various Hypervisors from VmWare, Microsoft and Xen. While that is a very good suggestion it doesn’t take into account that you may want to understand what overall options you have with virtualization. There is much more to a virtualization strategy than understanding the mechanics of Hypervisors.

I suggest it may be time for IT professionals to invest some time understanding the applications that their infrastructure is in place to support. After all, the purpose of IT is to enable the use of applications by their customers. When you spend a little time with applications as your focus you realize that we are conditioned to accept significant limitations in the way in which we interact with and manage applications. Spend a little time looking at application virtualization and not just Hypervisor mechanics and you may be surprised.

2007-07-23T06:31:00.000-07:00

This article centers mostly on Physical Virtualization, which does a solid job of optimizing today's energy efficient multi-core hardware. However, what people often forget is that a Virtual Machine is just that - a logical representation of a physical environment. The job of a Virtual Machine is to optimize physical hardware itself, it provides no unique value to the applications within it.

----------------------------------

This is yet another reason why Application Virtualization is a complementary technology to Physical Virtualization. While Physical Virtualization optimizes the hardware, Application Virtualization optimizes and provides new levels of "Control" for the application experience. The two key tenants of Application Virtualization are:

1) Decoupling the application from its infrastructure - making it easier to deploy/redeploy, update/patch, failover, monitor, audit and/or retire independent from the infrastructure.

2) Applications are everywhere - while most Application Virtualization discussions today center solely on Windows Desktop Applications, in reality there are thousands of applications critical to each enterprise, and most are heterogeneous. For example, an insurance claims management application is most likely running on a very large database on a UNIX server, its business logic is running on LINUX within a Web Application Server, and thousands of users are accessing the application via a GUI on a browser.

We can't lose sight of the massive scope and size of Application Virtualization, it could end up with the largest market size of all because the reason we are using computers in the first place is to access applications (on a server, a desktop, laptop, PDA/Phone, ATM Machine, DVR, etc.).

A core part of the liberation, the benefits of Application Virtualization can also be realized for older applications without creating limitations on how a new application must be written. Through Application Virtualization, you can run "all" applications, when, where and how you want. It needs to get to the point that applications, just work for all users.

2007-07-16T08:07:00.000-07:00

IDC’s annual report on the virtualization market re-enforces that the enterprise still has a great deal of work to do. Though there has been a great deal of progress, companies have not mastered the ability to drive down the power & cooling costs of the data center through virtualization. Hardware costs are one of three cost management areas in IT but software and human resource costs cannot be overlooked as they take up the majority. Physical & OS virtualization vendors are providing value by offering a mechanism for driving the hardware costs down such as power & cooling. But what is left behind is a more complex environment for software creating virtual application & OS bundles, which in turn becomes a more complex environment for configuration management by VM sprawl for IT personnel.

While physical virtualization drives down hardware costs, application virtualization furthers the cost reduction benefits and, more importantly, creates new business growth by tuning up or down the business applications in a “high control” fashion that before now was only possible in a limited fashion. Application virtualization can be used to complement physical and/or OS virtualization because it ensures that all data center applications can benefit from this consolidation effort. All this, without having to re-write a line of application code or support every unique OS type per application. Our customers are consolidating hundreds of applications previously written to run on an older OS. These apps are now running on consolidated servers leveraging a single service patch level of an OS. This is just the beginning of the opportunity for IT organizations.

Consolidation is just one step on the ladder to utility computing -- aligning IT to the pulse of each line of business. By leveraging otherwise complex and infrastructure-bound applications into modernized standard objects, businesses are realizing the benefits of running applications when, where and how they want.

Now that’s flexibility!

2007-07-02T07:13:00.000-07:00

Microsoft’s annual TechEd conference was held a few weeks ago and Microsoft was pitching their SoftGrid solution as a means to better manage the desktop. SoftGrid does help customers virtualize desktop applications but flexibility and ease of use is another story in the SoftGrid design.

Current and potential SoftGrid customers are very perturbed about the licensing. Microsoft always has issues surrounding licensing but SoftGrid’s licensing is subscription only based. Beyond the subscription only issue, you can’t purchase SoftGrid as a standalone product but only as part of the MDOP bundle.

You know a solution isn’t being well received when the customers start by complaining about pricing from the “get-go”.

SoftGrid requires a back-end server(s) to support deployment, installations and maintenance of “sequenced” desktop applications. That’s correct!! You need a back-end server to manage your virtualized desktop applications. Plus you need to install a SoftGrid client on every desktop.

With Microsoft, it seems like you always need a back-end server. But even with that entire back-end infrastructure you can’t virtualize an existing application. You first need to “sequence” all applications. Sequencing an application means that you start with a “greenfield” approach. You must re-install the application from start. Now, reinstalling every desktop application in order to virtualize it can’t be fun. And if you can’t find the source to reinstall the application, you’re not going to virtualize that desktop application. Even if you have the source who knows whether “older” desktop applications will install or “sequence” properly.Every time you add new content to the existing application or upgrade it you need to re-sequence A major drawback with Softgrid is that it doesn’t support “contexting”. The sequenced apps can view the context (aka files, folder and registry entries) of the underlying OS but they can’t share context with other apps. Even if they need to. In order to work around this short coming you need to sequence all applications that must share information with each other at the same time. A concept called “suiting”. Microsoft tells many companies to install MS office on the underlying OS and then sequence like applications together. In other words, the most prolific application on the Windows desktop is recommended to remain physically installed on the desktop and not virtualized. Again there are limitations here beyond licensing.

Trigence launched its Windows solution at TechEd. The Trigence AE solution now supports both Windows desktops and server. In fact, the solution for the Windows desktop and the servers are identical.

There is no server back-end or client infrastructure required for the Trigence Solution. It’s “Serverless”. The Trigence solution also supplies a managed approach where it’s easy to integrate with any 3^rd party management tool. Trigence’s management approach can be accomplished through local (GUI or command line), remote (via CIM) or Management API interfaces.

Trigence capsules are easy to deploy since they can be delivered as self-extracting executables. They can even be run on a USB stick. Now that’s flexibility!

Offsite Development and Maintenance of Corporate Applications

2007-06-22T12:31:00.000-07:00

Offsite development and maintenance of corporate applications is a reality today. Sure IT organizations are still developing and updating some business critical applications internally but the cost for such development activities are rapidly becoming prohibitive.

Outsourcing has gotten a bad name lately, not because outsourcing is inherently bad, but rather because most IT organizations have handled it badly. Most IT organizations are a captive of their day-to-day operations and really lack the time and skills to disentangle their applications and development/test environments from their infrastructure.

If the IT organizations wishes to outsource their application development, updates or maintenance activities to an offsite development group (even an internal one), it takes months and months to prepare such an endeavor. By that time, the benefits of leveraging offsite or outsourced application development expertise can many times outrun its projected labor and cost savings.

How would you streamline offsite development? How would you turn offsite development into a rapid offsite development process? You certainly don’t want to spend months or years defining such a strategy. If your application, development and test engineers are tied up in such an activity, they are most likely not producing any really worthwhile enterprise deliverables.

Cloning the application, development and test environments is the easiest way to accomplish it. Yeah, I mean simply clone the entire environmentso that the offsite development team doesn’t have to reinstall everything and they can run the environment on commodity hardware or any virtualization environment such as VMware.

Look, I don’t mean simply ghosting an entire server or workstation. Ghosting requires that the hardware profile between the source and target server must be the same or very similar. You want to capture and clone only the necessary parts of the applications and their development/test environments. Ghosting takes everything and usually takes more time than simply re-installing. It’s painful.

Conversely, the offsite development group could return the cloned application with the new functionality or updates applied. Since they had the cloned environment, they would already have run exhaustive unit, functional, system and integration tests. Hence, it would be easy to accept the updated cloned application back into the production environment.

I know that Trigence has a solution that allows an IT organization to capture existing applications and complex development/test environments. Once they’re captured, they become clones of the existing corporate environment. Trigence calls this process encapsulation.

Encapsulation is an activity that captures the application and its dependencies and places them into a capsule. A capsule is a secure and separate environment that effectively “decouples” the application from the operating system and the underlying infrastructure. A development and test environment is a quasi-application that can be encapsulated in the same manner.

Encapsulation also gives you a granular means to select the application and parts of the development and test environments that you really need.

Now it’s easy. You clone the required application and their corresponding development and test environments. If a new application is required, a baseline capsule can be created that includes the standard corporate framework required for all new application development. The offsite development group then has a known baseline from which to start.

These capsules become deliverables that the IT organization ships via standard storage devices. The capsules that contain the applications and the development/test environments are delivered to the offsite development location. Any system administrator can perform the encapsulation activity so the corporate IT organization doesn’t need to engage their application, development or test experts. The encapsulation process could take hours as opposed to weeks and more likely months. Some IT organizations have simply given up trying to perform this activity.

The offsite development group can then easily install these Trigence AE capsules since they come as a single compressed file. They simply expand the capsules and start the application and development/test environments. Again they can run these capsules on commodity hardware or any virtualization solution that they have on hand.

You can add context or update any existing propriety, file or directory in a Trigence AE capsule so all changes are made from the original cloned capsules. The offsite development group can clone the application capsules as many times as necessary in order to run exhaustive testing. The newly cloned capsule can be thrown away should the test fail or somehow corrupt the application.

Furthermore, any changes made in a capsule can be discarded as required. This allows users to create snapshots of the application and then restore the application to any previously created snapshot.

Once the application development efforts are complete and certified via comprehensive testing, the application is delivered back to the IT organization with all the appropriate updates, modifications or new functionality. It’s easy to reintroduce the application as a capsule back into the production environment: restore the compressed capsule, start it, perform a minimum set of functional, system and integration tests and accept the delivered application (that is, the capsule) into the production environment.

Trigence really has made Rapid Offsite (and/or Outsourced) Development a manageable, cost effective reality.

2007-06-01T06:36:00.000-07:00

Business Continuity or more euphemistically called Disaster Recovery has always been an inexact science. Many companies have unfortunately found out how woefully prepared they were when disasters such as 9/11 or natural disasters struck their production facilities.

The real question is: How do you really recover from such catastrophic disasters which simultaneously strand your best technical personnel at the same time? During an emergency how can all those highly skilled and trained personnel actually contribute to and create business continuity?

Many enterprises have dedicated DR sites but how well are they really maintained? Small and medium businesses can fair much more poorly. The reality is that large enterprises can often take weeks before they truly recover. In fact most small to medium size businesses actually don’t get truly operational for months.

Why should a large enterprise be up and running in weeks and the small to medium businesses take months? What parts of a business are truly the most important? The first to be up and running after a disaster? Basic IT infrastructure? Critical applications? The answer is - it depends.

Most enterprises, firms and companies simply have a set of bare bones servers and OS/application backups to apply to those servers. Sure large enterprises have dedicated DR sites but the cost is enormous. Are those DR sites well-maintained, update and fool-proof?

Why doesn’t every one just virtualize all the infrastructure and applications? If DR sites have limited ability and expertise to recover IT-related business functions, virtualization seems the ideal way to guarantee the success of your business being able to survive a disaster.

Sure you can run more virtualized servers such as VMware on a limited set of servers. Servers can always be ghosted but imaging a server with a single application can add up to lots of dollars very quickly.

If you want to go even one better than virtualized servers why not virtualize an application and its dependencies.