Latest Blog Posts

The perils of commoditising IT Support

(02 September 2010)

Life after ITIL – creating a culture of Continual Service Improvement

(03 August 2010)

10 reasons to migrate to Exchange 2010

(28 July 2010)

Are you Off-Sure about your IT Service Desk?

(15 July 2010)

Mind the skill gap

(12 July 2010)

Microsoft should fear not – is Apple even in the same league?

(25 June 2010)

Is your IT Service Desk future proof?

(23 June 2010)

The quest for a portable office - are all mobile devices safe for work?

(22 June 2010)

Will Tablets rule the future?

(17 June 2010)

Getting back to work - but with a service provider.

(16 June 2010)

Cloud computing: how to minimise lock-in risks

(10 June 2010)

Public sector, private data - is outsourcing the Service Desk too risky?

(03 June 2010)

Doing more with less: an opportunity to learn

(07 May 2010)

Sharing the IT Service Desk: sharing cost, sharing quality

(04 May 2010)

So, Microsoft outsources IT support – What’s all the fuss about?

(28 April 2010)

Survey reveals 1/3 of UK organisations put off Windows 7 roll-out, but are they wise to wait?

(14 April 2010)

Is information safe enough at NHS trusts?

(01 April 2010)

Best Practice and Virtualisation: essential tools in Business Resilience and Continuity planning

(25 March 2010)

What to look for when bringing offshore work back home

(22 March 2010)

5 thoughts on the IT Service Desk that need re-thinking

(10 March 2010)

Microsoft System Center Service Manager 2010: a credible challenger in the Service Management software market?

(17 February 2010)

Do you really want to lose (inter)face?

(15 February 2010)

A new lease of IT life

(11 February 2010)

From ITIL v2 to v3 – where to start?

(08 February 2010)

Can you afford not to invest in Best Practice?

(02 February 2010)

Experiential Learning explained through Confucius

(02 February 2010)

Quick win, quick fall if you fail to plan ahead

(11 January 2010)

Cloud computing – Help your IT out of the Tetris effect

(08 January 2010)

One of you may be fired

(17 December 2009)

Hot or not. ..Says who?

(15 December 2009)

2012: avoiding the IT Apocalypse

(03 December 2009)

Punishment alone does not work

(04 August 2009)

HSBC Data Loss

(27 July 2009)

ITIL for ITILs sake

(03 June 2009)

VDI and Windows 7

(07 May 2009)

The art of deception

(06 May 2009)

VDI - the revolution begins...

(05 May 2009)

Wake up and tackle the real VDI issues!

(24 March 2009)

ITIL Version 3

(18 February 2009)

Virtualisation - making the headlines

(18 February 2009)

Batten down the Hatches!

(18 February 2009)

Overcome the Freeze

(10 January 2007)

One of you may be fired

Posted in Infrastructure on 17 December 2009 by

Those of us old enough still remember the advertising slogan suggesting that 'no one ever got fired for buying IBM'. And it was largely true. Many IT managers spent a lot of money on IBM systems as it appeared a risk free option - even if they were not always convinced it was the best solution for the business.  

The sentiment is not confined to IBM of course. More recently you could easily replace IBM with names such as Microsoft, Cisco or Dell, for example. The problem is that it is there are usually too many options available. And the same is true when it comes to virtualisation.

With a list of benefits as long as your arm, the decision to adopt a virtual desktop infrastructure in the first place seems a no brainer. But that's where the easy decisions end. Once committed to virtualising the environment, many organisations quickly become bogged down with the sheer number of options, features and functionalities. 

So, rather than using an unbiased and well-researched approach to the platform selection process, far too many organisations are making snap judgements based on unfounded or irrelevant criteria - or simply on a name.

So who are the front runners? Unless IT managers have been living in the Himalayas for the last five years, they will certainly be aware of VMWare, Microsoft HyperV and Citrix with its XenDesktop. But there are also a number of other suppliers such as Quest and Sun with their own, lesser known offerings that should not be ruled out.

The problem often lies in the criteria organisations use to select their platforms. What they need to do is carefully detail what is required and which platform best meets those needs. After all, the main benefits of virtualisation are achieved in the long term and these will be negated if an unsuitable platform is selected in the first instance.

For example, when deliberating between Microsoft Hyper V and VMWare, it is easy to get caught up in comparisons between up-front cost and perceived compatibility with a current operational platform. HyperV may appear to be cheaper than VMWare at first glance, but this will only be the case for organisations for which it is the fit-for-purpose solution.

There are clearly many organisations where HyperV is the right choice, but elsewhere, while there may be initial savings to be made on up-front cost, these will soon be forgotten once the platform begins to come up short further down the line. Equally, choosing VMWare because of its reputation and positive press will be as costly for organisations that cannot hope to utilise its vast scope within the requirements of their environments - or for those that discover incompatibility issues later down the line when it is too late.

It is surprising how often companies get this wrong. So, before you reach for the cheque book, make sure you have looked carefully at what you are signing up for or take independent expert advice. At the very least you can then blame it on someone else.

David Cowan, Head of Infrastructure

Post your Comments

Your name: (required)

Your email: (required, never displayed)

Comments