An important consideration for the IT staff planning a large VDI rollout (i.e., thousands of virtual desktops) is that, because UDP traffic doesn't lend itself to traffic shaping, there is the risk of saturating the WAN link. Without forethought and careful planning, large numbers of users connecting into View over PCoIP could choke the link into submission. An alternative would be to use Microsoft's TCP-based RDP (which View supports) to deliver virtual desktops to external users, but then you give up the benefits inherent in PCoIP.
Both HDX and PCoIP provide an excellent way of sending lots of data -– video, audio, interactive –- over a constrained WAN link. Both help mitigate a certain degree of latency, and even in low-bandwidth situations they can make remote users feel as if they are connected to the LAN. But HDX and PCoIP are not able to overcome a slow WAN link. For Windows 7 Aero-enabled desktops, a fast WAN or LAN link will be required.
The remote desktop protocol is not the only consideration when choosing a VDI solution, but it is something that network admins will have to keep in mind during the initial planning stages. The adoption of PCoIP could increase the cost of deployment if essential network services that don't handle UDP well have to be upgraded. Will the end-user be able to tell a difference between TCP-based HDX and UDP-based PCoIP? Probably not. Both handle their duties well and provide the end-user with the remote experience they expect. Just add this to the long check list of items for the network admin.
This article, "VDI shoot-out: HDX vs. PCoIP," was originally published at InfoWorld.com. Follow the latest developments in virtualization at InfoWorld.com. For the latest business technology news, follow InfoWorld.com on Twitter.