Virtual Desktops: The good, the bad, and the (very) ugly
Virtual desktops have been around since the early days of office computer use, where a terminal connected to a central mainframe. In recent years, there has been a resurgence of virtual desktops, either hosted in the cloud or in remote data centers because they enable end users to access their desktop from anywhere on any kind of endpoint device. Although virtual desktop infrastructure (VDI) is considered by many companies as a potential solution, it may not be suitable for every organization.
The good
VDI offers high levels of automation, such as the ability to upgrade business-wide applications with a simple reboot. Additionally, VDI enforces consistency through the use of one or a few "golden images" to create each virtual machine. This approach can reduce issues with complex applications, especially during updates.
Typically, the device used to access VDI can be of low specifications as all processing occurs within the VDI environment, leading to cost savings on equipment. However, this shifts the cost from Capital Expenditure (CapEx) to Operating Expenditure (OpEx), affecting depreciation.
VDI provides an efficient solution to many compliance challenges and can mitigate the significant budget that may otherwise be required. In high compliance settings, it is advisable to always consider VDI.
One huge use case for VDI is as a disaster recovery service. For clients that are impacted by Texas’ annual winter storms, CGP deploys virtual desktops so that staff can continue to work, even if they have to remote in from non-company devices. This allows a rapid scale up based on need, and incurs only a short term cost to the company.
The bad
The main disadvantage of VDI is its higher cost when implemented properly. If the cost savings are substantial, this is often a sign that corners are being cut. When evaluating VDI, it's important to consider if the benefits outweigh the costs. With advancements in automation and remote technology, such as Microsoft 365's Intune and Autopilot, many remote work scenarios can now be achieved without VDI.
Using a third party, non-public cloud (i.e. Amazon and Microsoft) VDI also means you will have significant migration costs in the event you were ever to make a change. Vendor lock in is a major business advantage these days, due to how fast technology moves.
The (very) ugly
There is a significant, often overlooked risk when using certain types of hosted VDI. Private data centers were popular in the 2000s and 2010s but are losing popularity due to potential liability and the advanced capabilities of leading public cloud providers. The rapidly growing number of cyberattacks have made these private data centers and hosting services attractive targets for hackers, who can compromise an entire datacenter and its customers. Due to this risk, many cyber insurance providers do not insure these types of providers. Before signing any agreements, it’s important to obtain a certificate of insurance (COI) to ensure proper security measures are in place, and have a contingency plan for outages.
Why aren’t Amazon and Microsoft exposed to these types of attacks?
Theoretically they could be, but both companies have built their software to isolate customers from each other, and the provider themselves has very limited access to your account. Think of a duplex vs an apartment complex - the smaller providers are more akin to a duplex where there are substantial shared services, and the environment/software was not designed for multiple tenants from day 1.
Clear Guidance Partners utilizes VDI for multiple clients, often in a hybrid configuration. Historically, CGP has helped more companies move off VDI vs to it. A good conversation about VDI starts with reviewing the use case and costs to figure out what makes sense. Discuss with a partner today!