<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: HP further improves it&#8217;s virtualization offerings</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.bladewatch.com/2008/09/10/hp-furthers-virtualization-offerings/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.bladewatch.com/2008/09/10/hp-furthers-virtualization-offerings/</link>
	<description>Tracking servers and enterprise technology.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 03 Feb 2012 11:11:22 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
<xhtml:meta xmlns:xhtml="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" name="robots" content="noindex" />
	<item>
		<title>By: VDIguru</title>
		<link>http://www.bladewatch.com/2008/09/10/hp-furthers-virtualization-offerings/#comment-44313</link>
		<dc:creator>VDIguru</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Sep 2008 15:54:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bladewatch.com/?p=3886#comment-44313</guid>
		<description>We&#039;ve been testing virtualization from both VMware and Citrix here in our datacenter for some time.  Both options have improved markedly since their initial introduction.   We&#039;ve found that server hardware choice has been less of a deciding factor than the desktop, as we plan to use this technology for our users beyond the call center team.  We&#039;ve been testing PCs as the desktop, but found that it simply doubled our efforts, having to manage the virtual machine user instance and the PC desktop OS image.  We also tried thin clients from HP and Wyse, and have chosen to go with the Wyse boxes.  The deciding factor was support for multimedia, multi screen, and USB peripheral support in the Wyse, that was not in HP.   Only with the Wyse did our &quot;knowledge&quot; users find the experience satisfactory.   Nothing wrong with the HP clients, but they didn&#039;t add anything to the equation over the PCs.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>We&#39;ve been testing virtualization from both VMware and Citrix here in our datacenter for some time.  Both options have improved markedly since their initial introduction.   We&#39;ve found that server hardware choice has been less of a deciding factor than the desktop, as we plan to use this technology for our users beyond the call center team.  We&#39;ve been testing PCs as the desktop, but found that it simply doubled our efforts, having to manage the virtual machine user instance and the PC desktop OS image.  We also tried thin clients from HP and Wyse, and have chosen to go with the Wyse boxes.  The deciding factor was support for multimedia, multi screen, and USB peripheral support in the Wyse, that was not in HP.   Only with the Wyse did our &#8220;knowledge&#8221; users find the experience satisfactory.   Nothing wrong with the HP clients, but they didn&#39;t add anything to the equation over the PCs.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

