Resource Support Resource Support
Contact Us Contact Us
Home / Products & Solutions / VMware Replacement for State‑Owned Enterprises

VMware Replacement for State‑Owned Enterprises

In the past, most virtual desktop management relied on Citrix or VMware. However, following the ICBC US subsidiary incident, the Xinchuang (indigenous innovation) substitution policy, and the withdrawal of Citrix and VMware Horizon from mainland China, there is an urgent need for replacement products. In addition, a smooth transition from the existing environment to the new platform must be taken into consideration.

4 Desktop Replacement/Migration Approaches

Replace Only the Access Protocol
Replace the Access Protocol First, then Migrate the Desktop
Only Migrate the Data
Virtual-to-Virtual Migration

Advantages

Zero‑Cost Smooth Transition： Replace the access protocol without new hardware. Imperceptible Progressive Migration: Support small‑scale phased switchovers with zero user awareness, ensuring business continuity throughout. Extremely Low Implementation Risk: Each single switchover completes in a short window (typically <1 hour), avoiding the risks of batch migration. Universal Applicability: No user cooperation needed, overcomes institutional coordination hurdles, and fits all customer types.

Drawbacks

1. Compatibility verification between the legacy and new protocols is required; prior POC testing is strongly advised. 2. The complete migration process takes a considerable amount of time, since it must be executed incrementally in several phases.

Applicable Scenarios

1. Core systems of financial institutions that have "zero tolerance" for business endpoint disruptions. 2. Safe and risk-averse replacement for ultra‑large‑scale endpoints (tens of thousands of nodes). 3. Sensitive scenarios where user training costs must be avoided.

Advantages

Zero-Cost Smooth Transition: Replace the access protocol without new hardware Imperceptible Progressive Migration: Gradual switchovers with zero user awareness ensure uninterrupted business operations. Extremely Low Implementation Risk: Each switchover takes under an hour, eliminating risks of batch migration. Universal Applicability: No user cooperation needed, overcomes institutional coordination hurdles, and fits all customer types.

Disadvantages

1. Compatibility between the existing and new protocols must be ensured; it is strongly recommended to conduct a POC validation in advance. 2. The complete migration cycle is relatively lengthy, as the process needs to be carried out in multiple batches.

Applicable Scenarios

1. Core systems of financial institutions that have a "zero‑tolerance" policy for business endpoint disruptions. 2. Eliable and low‑risk replacement for ultra‑large‑scale endpoints (thousands of nodes) 3. Sensitive scenarios where user training costs must be avoided.

Advantages

Easy Implementation： – lightweight architecture with low technical adaptation requirements and a low deployment barrier. Cost Control： – minimal resource investment, particularly suitable for small‑to‑medium projects with limited budgets.

Disadvantages

Relies on User Cooperation： – requires end users to actively participate in migration operations, making coordination and management more challenging. Business Interruption Risk ：– requires a long downtime window (typically hours to days), which is unfriendly to businesses with high continuity requirements.

Applicable Scenarios

1. Pooled desktop users who can accept downtime during migration. 2. Projects with highly cooperative users and flexible migration windows.

Advantages

High Business Continuity： – no long downtime windows; critical operations remain uninterrupted. Smooth Transition： – progressive migration via virtualization‑layer conversion; users perceive no change.

Disadvantages

High Implementation Cost：– extra V2V tools and new cluster required; significant upfront investment. High Technical Complexity： – virtualization‑layer conversion leads to longer cycles and needs expert support.

Applicable Scenarios

1. Financial and healthcare core systems with strict continuity requirements. 2. Enterprise customers with adequate budget and tolerance for complex implementation.
桌面不迁移，仅迁移数据

Advantages

Zero‑Cost Smooth Transition： Replace the access protocol without new hardware. Imperceptible Progressive Migration: Support small‑scale phased switchovers with zero user awareness, ensuring business continuity throughout. Extremely Low Implementation Risk: Each single switchover completes in a short window (typically <1 hour), avoiding the risks of batch migration. Universal Applicability: No user cooperation needed, overcomes institutional coordination hurdles, and fits all customer types.

Drawbacks

1. Compatibility verification between the legacy and new protocols is required; prior POC testing is strongly advised. 2. The complete migration process takes a considerable amount of time, since it must be executed incrementally in several phases.

Applicable Scenarios

1. Core systems of financial institutions that have "zero tolerance" for business endpoint disruptions. 2. Safe and risk-averse replacement for ultra‑large‑scale endpoints (tens of thousands of nodes). 3. Sensitive scenarios where user training costs must be avoided.
桌面不迁移，仅迁移数据

Advantages

Zero-Cost Smooth Transition: Replace the access protocol without new hardware Imperceptible Progressive Migration: Gradual switchovers with zero user awareness ensure uninterrupted business operations. Extremely Low Implementation Risk: Each switchover takes under an hour, eliminating risks of batch migration. Universal Applicability: No user cooperation needed, overcomes institutional coordination hurdles, and fits all customer types.

Disadvantages

1. Compatibility between the existing and new protocols must be ensured; it is strongly recommended to conduct a POC validation in advance. 2. The complete migration cycle is relatively lengthy, as the process needs to be carried out in multiple batches.

Applicable Scenarios

1. Core systems of financial institutions that have a "zero‑tolerance" policy for business endpoint disruptions. 2. Eliable and low‑risk replacement for ultra‑large‑scale endpoints (thousands of nodes) 3. Sensitive scenarios where user training costs must be avoided.
桌面不迁移，仅迁移数据

Advantages

Easy Implementation： – lightweight architecture with low technical adaptation requirements and a low deployment barrier. Cost Control： – minimal resource investment, particularly suitable for small‑to‑medium projects with limited budgets.

Disadvantages

Relies on User Cooperation： – requires end users to actively participate in migration operations, making coordination and management more challenging. Business Interruption Risk ：– requires a long downtime window (typically hours to days), which is unfriendly to businesses with high continuity requirements.

Applicable Scenarios

1. Pooled desktop users who can accept downtime during migration. 2. Projects with highly cooperative users and flexible migration windows.
桌面不迁移，仅迁移数据

Advantages

High Business Continuity： – no long downtime windows; critical operations remain uninterrupted. Smooth Transition： – progressive migration via virtualization‑layer conversion; users perceive no change.

Disadvantages

High Implementation Cost：– extra V2V tools and new cluster required; significant upfront investment. High Technical Complexity： – virtualization‑layer conversion leads to longer cycles and needs expert support.

Applicable Scenarios

1. Financial and healthcare core systems with strict continuity requirements. 2. Enterprise customers with adequate budget and tolerance for complex implementation.

Core Technological Advantages

Virtualization Layer Agnosticism – Fully Self-Developed OEIDP Desktop Transport Protocol
Virtualization Layer Agnosticism – Fully Self-Developed OEIDP Desktop Transport Protocol

With virtualization layer agnosticism, the protocol can easily manage virtual machines hosted on third-party virtualization platforms. The independently developed OEIDP desktop protocol reduces intermediate image processing steps, lowering interaction latency. Combined with QUIC (Quick UDP Internet Connections), it delivers an average 30% reduction in interactive latency. In addition, local encoding on the virtual machines avoids excessive CPU usage on the server, which would otherwise cause lag on all virtual machines within that node.

Adaptive Content-Aware Encoding to Minimize Visual Quality Loss
Adaptive Content-Aware Encoding to Minimize Visual Quality Loss

The system leverages intelligent algorithms to dynamically analyze screen content and apply tailored compression strategies for different content types (e.g., images, text, video). This approach reduces protocol bandwidth usage while effectively preserving visual fidelity.

The Protocol Adopts QUIC as the Link‑Layer Protocol to Reduce Interactive Latency
The Protocol Adopts QUIC as the Link‑Layer Protocol to Reduce Interactive Latency

From the moment the user views the screen to the feedback generated by keyboard and mouse operations, each frame takes only 6.94 ms in total, achieving a latency reduction of approximately 19%. Combined with the protocol's direct‑connection mode without a host proxy, the average interactive latency can be reduced by 30%, directly enhancing the user experience.

Refined Desktop Availability Monitoring and Fault Warning
Refined Desktop Availability Monitoring and Fault Warning

The system delivers refined desktop availability monitoring with proactive fault perception, enabling timely warnings the moment issues are detected. It provides reminders for long‑power‑on and long‑idle endpoints or PCs, monitors and alerts for high temperature, heavy load, and network jitter, offers one‑click repair requests and remote assistance along with analysis of frequent failure causes, and notifies administrators of any hardware or accessory changes on endpoints.

Drastically Reduced Bandwidth at the Same Image Quality – Saving Up to 94% of Bandwidth
Drastically Reduced Bandwidth at the Same Image Quality – Saving Up to 94% of Bandwidth

Under identical image quality, the OEIDP protocol reduces bandwidth consumption by up to 94%. When transmitting screen content, only the changed portions of the screen are updated, minimising the amount of data that needs to be transferred. This further improves user experience while reducing resource and bandwidth usage.

Visual Peripheral Console
Visual Peripheral Console

Visually display the types of peripherals connected to the desktop (e.g., shared printers, network printers, USB printers, etc.). Monitor in real time the availability status of each endpoint's peripherals (e.g., online, offline, shared user online). Enable installation, reuse, and default setting of peripheral drivers and configurations via simple Ctrl+C and Ctrl+V operations.