Has any one out there used Pano for thin Client, I am in the process of implementataion and I was wondering what is the difference between these 2 boxes and how is the user experience?
We evaluated the Pano's and HP thin clients and went with the Pano's. The display performance is supposed to get better in October (Pano is switching to a proprietary protocol away from RDP) and the USB device support is so much better in the Pano's. The Panologic guys will send you a couple of 30 day demo units if you'll ask them. Go ahead and give them a try. I was a little skeptical at first but once I played with them some, I was sold.
You can also use the Pano's without VirtualCenter, direct connecting to a single esx3i server. That's what we did.
Have you been able to make the Panos work in a WAN environment? We tested some in an environment with a <12ms round trip time and they were awful - slower than pure RDP actually. We even tried stepping them back from the 2.5 (CDS-based) release to the 2.0.x release at tech support's suggestion. This didn't help a whole lot, honestly.
No doubt that the performance on the LAN is incredible, but unless it can work from remote offices, too, then the box has a limited usefulness IMHO.
I am doing the management across the WAN. I placed a local esx3.5 at each location where their vm resides, put the pano at that location (T1 lines) but have them talk back to the PanoMGMT server at my main location. I didn't want individual PanoMGMT for each of my locations.
I had been evaluating Wyse terminals for about 4 months before trying the Pano devices. I have now had a couple Pano's for about a month and I am completely sold. The major hangup at my establishment was the need to use a specific brand of proximity badge reader. The badge readers are USB and do not work over and RDP connection. They did not work with the Wyse TCX USB virtualizer either. After speaking with a Wyse engineer, they pretty much told me they wouldn't even try to make the devices work unless we were going to purchase a large number of devices (100 wasn't enough to persuade them). The device did not initially work on the Pano either, but after a quick call to Pano support, they got to work and had the devices working within 5 hours. From a support standpoint, Pano has been fantastic.
The other feature I preferred is the ease with which Pano devices can be assigned to a specific virtual desktop. We have some device specific applications (require static IP) and support with the Wyse terminals was getting messy with all the INI files we needed. The Pano Manager provided a simple point and click web interface to accomplish this same task.
It is also nice to not have an additional OS to worry about patching. It takes enough time keeping up with Windows XP patches. Adding Wyse OS or WinXPe into the mix just seemed like added work without much benefit.
I hope that didn't sound like an advertisement. I am working through some issues with the Pano devices, but overall, in my environment, the Pano's are easier to deploy and require less maintenance.
My sediments exactly. We seem to have a similar situation in regards to our VM's requiring static IPs, proprietary USB device printers (well serial actually) and I am loving the management side of the Pano. I was not impressed with dealing with two OS's for each "thin client" and the manager for Wyse. It's good to see others finally posting good things about these devices, I thought I was alone.
They Wyse devices give you more options, you can connect to your VDI enviornment regardless of the broker you select to use. Also the management options are by far the simpliest. if you dont want to use the free management software that is provided you can setup a dhcp option tag to define the View server address and the devices can come from out of the box and plug directly into the network and be ready to go. There are people that are using the WTOS devices and sending them to locations where there is no techincal presence and the end users simply unbox the debice and plug in the cable ( keyboard, mouse, power, network and video).
I know it has been a while since your last post on this but I was wondering, we just had a sales pitch and we were told that we should not use static IPs for the boxes. How did using Static IPs effect your environment?
We need to use static because of our regulations and was really digging the Pano Boxes until he said that...