April 2009

You are currently browsing the monthly archive for April 2009.

App Store for the Enterprise?

Tuesday, April 28, 2009 in Virtualization by slowe | 4 comments

This is interesting: IT Structures announced today that they were selected by VMware to work together to provide the App on Demand feature for virtual appliances, part of the Virtual Appliance Marketplace. The full press release is here.

I’ve never heard the Virtual Appliance Marketplace described this way, but the e-mail I received from IT Structures (which I’m sure quite a few people received as well) described it as “the iPhone App Store for the enterprise”. I suppose that is a valid comparison, but it certainly doesn’t do anything for the growing image that the Virtual Appliance Marketplace is not the place to go for enterprise-class virtual machines. Most people seem to see the Virtual Appliance Marketplace as the place to go for home-grown, hobbyist solutions, but not for enterprise-ready virtual appliances that even the largest companies could trust. In my mind, comparing the Virtual Appliance Marketplace to the iPhone App Store doesn’t do anything for its enterprise image.

Perhaps the rise of the Virtual Appliance Marketplace does signal “an important shift in how enterprise applications will be evaluated and sold,” but is this the right shift?

Tags: ,

Desktop Virtualization Interview with Eric Hanselman of Leostream

Monday, April 27, 2009 in Virtualization by slowe | 6 comments

Continuing on in our series of executive interviews, next up we have Eric Hanselman, Director of Professional and Technical Services for Leostream. Eric and I discussed the current state of desktop virtualization and what may be keeping organizations from fully adopting desktop virtualization.

The Interview

blog.scottlowe.org (BSL): Experts and analysts have been predicting for the last couple of years “this year is the year of desktop virtualization.” Do you think is true for 2009? Why or why not?

Eric Hanselman (EH): There are a number of influences that are converging to push VDI forward this year. Desktop refresh efforts have been holding for some time, and there’s been a significant pause before moving to Windows Vista. With the official close of easy Windows XP purchasing, organizations have been prodded into considering next steps.

At the same time, virtualization infrastructures have matured. IT teams are moving out of the frenzied times of server virtualization and are now seeing the operational benefits that it brings. Economic drivers such as consolidation and mergers are pushing a greater demand for cost reduction. And to top it all off, client and viewing solution offerings in s have matured. The result is that very capable VDI solutions can now be built that address the needs of the enterprise.

BSL: Do you feel that adoption of desktop virtualization is accelerating? If so, what factors do you think are driving the increased rate of adoption? If not, what factors are slowing it down?

EH: Yes, we see adoption accelerating. There are two main drivers of accelerated adoption of virtual desktops: compliance and operational efficiency. The compliance aspect is driven by a growing desire to prevent data loss and more stringent data access requirements driven by increasingly sophisticated auditors. VDI is a great way to manage and control where critical data flows in the organization.

On the operational efficiency front, VDI has the ability to significantly reduce operating expenses by centralizing desktop maintenance and reducing desk-side support needs.

BSL: If you had to pick the top three challenges that absolutely must be addressed in order for an organization to be successful in a desktop virtualization implementation, what would those challenges be?

EH: First would be managing the end user experience of moving to VDI. The most successful implementations address end user concerns by making the VDI experience as much like traditional desktop as possible. This includes keeping the user authentication process the same (no additional logins), delivering screen layouts that behave in the same way that physical do (splitting, rather than spanning multiple display systems), and giving the best possible display performance.

The second would be to address the structural and political aspects of VDI in the organization early in the implementation cycle. VDI touches many different aspects of IT operations. It brings the desktop realm into tight integration with the server and storage infrastructure. This means that two groups that don’t often work together (in larger enterprises, at least) find themselves working together very closely. Issues around policy management and control will definitely arise. Savvy project leaders will address these issues early on, before they can become a significant problem.

The third is to understand the changes required when an organization moves from relatively simple proof of concept tests to full production deployment. Often, the requirements of the production deployment aren’t fully explored in early testing. For example, functionality such as end user authentication and integration into the production authentication environment aren’t examined and delineated in the first phases. Other issues, such as remote access are often left until late in the project, which can lead to unpleasant surprises in the transition from pilot to production.

BSL: Technical folks love to debate the merits of the various transport protocols (RDP, ICA, ALP, etc.) In your opinion, how important is the transport protocol as part of the overall solution?

EH: Very important. The transport of the viewing protocol is a critical design decision in any VDI project. Different viewing technologies have varying strengths and weaknesses. Successful implementations embrace the ability to match the right viewing protocol to the correct end-user environment. A viewing protocol that works well on a local network connection may perform poorly in a more challenging network environment.

The Closing

I can attest that I, too, have seen an increase in interest around desktop virtualization, although that doesn’t necessarily match up to an increase in actual deployments. What about you, the readers? How does desktop virtualization play into your short-term and long-term plans? Please feel free to share your thoughts in the comments.

Tags: ,

New Folders with Quicksilver

Wednesday, April 22, 2009 in Macintosh by slowe | 8 comments

Prompted by this Twitter status update, I started looking around for a way to create a new folder using Quicksilver. For those of you that aren’t familiar with Quicksilver, it’s a bit hard to describe. I think someone once described it as an “extensible interface for manipulating objects” or some such. In any case, it is an extremely powerful tool for streamlining many, many operations on your Mac.

So, in case you’re interested, there are two ways to do this. Here’s the first method:

  1. Invoke Quicksilver. On my Mac, I use Opt+Space to invoke Quicksilver.
  2. In the first pane, start typing to have Quicksilver try to find the object you’re seeking. In this case, we’re trying to select the parent folder for the new folder we are going to create. So, if we wanted to create a new folder in our personal Documents folder, we’d start by typing ~ (tilde). That would select our Home folder. Then start typing Documents until it matches that. Continue until you’ve found the parent folder of the new folder you are going to create.
  3. Press Tab to move the action pane and select New Folder. (Just start typing New Folder until it matches.)
  4. Press Tab to move to the object pane. You should be in a text entry field. Type in the name of the new folder you’d like to create. Press Enter when you’re done.
  5. Quicksilver creates the folder, and then places the new folder in the subject pane with a default action of Open. Press Enter and it will open the new folder you just created.

Pretty handy, eh?

Here’s the second method. This method assumes you have a Finder window open and can select the parent folder of the new folder you want to create. For example, let’s say that I have a folder in my personal Documents folder named Customers, and within that I want to create a folder named XYZCorp.

  1. Use Finder to navigate to the parent folder of the new folder that you want to create. Click once to select it.
  2. Invoke Quicksilver and press Cmd+G to take the object selected in Finder and put it in the subject pane.
  3. Press Tab to move the action pane and select New Folder. (Just start typing New Folder until it matches.)
  4. Press Tab to move to the object pane. You should be in a text entry field. Type in the name of the new folder you’d like to create. Press Enter when you’re done.
  5. Quicksilver creates the folder, and then places the new folder in the subject pane with a default action of Open. Press Enter and it will open the new folder you just created.

I think I like the first method better, but both approaches are pretty good.

Feel free to share other Quicksilver tips you may have in the comments. Thanks!

Tags:

Mastering VMware vSphere 4.0

Tuesday, April 21, 2009 in Virtualization by slowe | 20 comments

It’s finally time! I’m very excited to announce the details of the book I’ve been working on for the last couple of months: Mastering VMware vSphere 4.0, by Sybex (an imprint of Wiley Publishing).

Mastering VMware vSphere 4.0 tackles every major technology area within vSphere—including installation of ESX/ESXi and vCenter Server, vCenter Update Manager, vSphere’s new storage architecture and capabilities, vSphere’s new networking functionality (like the vNetwork Distributed Switch and the Cisco Nexus 1000V). It’s all in there! At least, we’ve tried our best to make sure it’s all in there!

Mastering VMware vSphere 4.0 should be available for pre-order later this summer and will be on the shelves by late September. We really, really, really tried to have it ready before VMworld 2009 in late August/early September, but the production schedule was just too aggressive to ensure a quality work.

I know it’s still early yet, but I do want to go ahead and publicly thank those that have been working with me. To Rick, Agatha, Jennifer, and Chad: a huge thank you for all your help. This book wouldn’t be what it is without your help.

As soon as I have a link to the book on Amazon or any other online resellers I’ll be sure to post something here. I’m also working with the publisher on some promotional campaigns, so be sure to stay tuned for more information on that. And spread the word, please! Tell everyone you know who’s interested in virtualization about this book.

Tags: , , ,

Marathon everRun 2G and everRun VM Lockstep

Monday, April 20, 2009 in Microsoft, Virtualization by slowe | 6 comments

I first wrote about Marathon Technologies and their everRun VM product last September just prior to the start of VMworld 2008 in Las Vegas, NV. Back at the start of 2009 I also mentioned Marathon’s joint development agreement with Microsoft and the intended plan to bring everRun VM to Hyper-V environments.

Today Marathon announced the availability of their everRun VM Lockstep product, which brings full circle the product announcement from last September. This product, which runs only on Citrix XenServer, puts into place the “three levels” of availability that Marathon has often spoke of:

  • Auto-restart high availability (XenServer HA)
  • Component-level fault tolerance
  • Full system-level fault tolerance

With full system-level fault tolerance, Marathon is able to provide organizations with the ability to protect applications with the highest levels of availability, eliminating downtime due to physical server failure. If a physical server fails, the virtual machine continues running on another physical server without any disruption.

The announcement of everRun VM Lockstep gives Marathon and Citrix a slight edge over competitor VMware, whose similar VMware Fault Tolerance offering has been demonstrated and discussed extensively but has not been officially announced. Given that Marathon expects everRun VM Lockstep to be available within 30 days, they may also have an edge over VMware in getting their product to market as well. Marathon everRun VM Lockstep will run on the free version of Citrix XenServer.

At the same time, Marathon is also announcing everRun 2G, the successor to Marathon’s everRun HA and everRun FT products for Windows Server environments. Marathon everRun 2G combines and extends the functionality of the previous generation of products, allowing organizations to provide high availability to any Windows application without modification or scripting. Like everRun VM, everRun 2G will offer “dialable” availability ranging from automated HA to full system-level fault tolerance.

Like everRun VM Lockstep, everRun 2G is expected to be available within the next 30 days.

Visit the Marathon Technologies web site for more information.

Tags: , , , ,

Question to my Readers

Wednesday, April 15, 2009 in General by slowe | 15 comments

One of the things that I thought might be interesting, perhaps even useful, to the readers would be to present various views on virtualization, cloud computing, etc., from industry executives. My first foray into this sort of thing was the recent e-mail interview with Surgient CTO, Dave Malcolm.

While I might think it is interesting or cool or useful, there are about 5,000 of you out there that may have a very different view. So, in the interest of trying to make this site as useful and informative as it can be, I’d like to know what you think. Is this idea a good idea? Do you find it interesting, informative? Or was it too “salesy”? I don’t want my site being turned into a platform for executives to just stand up and plug their products. Is there a better way I could do this, perhaps a different format? Should we require that people not plug their own products at all?

I’d love to hear your thoughts.

Tags: ,

Cloud Computing Interview with Dave Malcolm, CTO of Surgient

Thursday, April 9, 2009 in Virtualization by slowe | 1 comment

I recently had the pleasure of conducting an e-mail interview with Surgient’s Chief Technology Officer, Dave Malcolm. I’ve reprinted the question and answer session here. Enjoy!

The Interview

blog.scottlowe.org (BSL): The term “cloud computing” is used in a variety of different ways to describe a variety of different things. How would you define cloud computing?

Dave Malcolm (DM): I believe cloud computing is defined as a pool of abstracted, highly scalable, and managed computing infrastructure capable of running end customer applications and is billed or charged by consumption. Therefore I think it has five primary attributes:

  1. Dynamic Computing Infrastructure - This is the foundation for the cloud and should include a standardized, scalable, secure, and highly available physical infrastructure. It also must be virtualized with server, storage, and network virtualization.
  2. Self-Service Based Usage Model - Interacting with the cloud requires a self-service oriented approach. Self-service clouds must be intuitive and easy to use. The capabilities should include the ability to upload, build, deploy, schedule, manage, and report on the users’ business services, so they can manage the lifecycle of those services.
  3. Minimally or Self Managed - In order for an IT team or a service provider to efficiently provide a cloud for its constituents, they must leverage a technology platform that is self managed. Best-of-breed clouds enable self-management via software automation, leveraging the following capabilities:
    • Deployment and recovery of business services and their computing resources (in the cloud)
    • Self-service scheduling and reserving resource capacity
    • Configuration, management, and reporting of resource capacity allocations
    • Access control and policies for usage of resources by users
  4. Business Service Centric - Cloud computing must be business service centric. This is in stark contrast to more traditional system- or server-centric models. In most cases, users of the cloud generally want to run some business service or application for a specific, timely purpose; they don’t want to get bogged down in the system and network administration of the environment. They would prefer to quickly and easily access a dedicated instance of an entire business service—such as selecting to instantiate an ERP system in the cloud (even if it is a complex multi-server networked environment).
  5. Consumption Based Charging or Billing - Finally, cloud computing is usage-driven. Consumers pay for only what resources they use and therefore are charged or billed on a consumption-based model. Cloud computing platforms must provide mechanisms to capture usage information that enables chargeback reporting and/or integration with billing systems.

BSL: Based on your definition of cloud computing above, what would you say are the top three challenges to organizations seeking to embrace the cloud computing model?

DM: The top challenges are that most organizations face when organizations seek to embrace the cloud computing model is the lack of expertise, tools, and processes to implement, operate, and maintain a cloud computing infrastructure.

Tools - Most data center automation tools are not equipped to automate and manage resources in a dynamic computing infrastructure—they don’t comprehend the transient nature of servers and the associated networks and storage elements. They don’t have the ability to automate capacity management, enable self-service, or the instantiation of entire business services.

Expertise - Most organizations do not have deep expertise in understanding the requirements of a cloud computing environment, the deep knowledge of the technologies required, and experience with those technologies. Most organizations are learning and have mastered some pieces of the puzzle, but no one I have come across has a comprehensive understanding and the full expertise necessary.

Processes and best Practices - Most IT processes and best practices have been built around static physical infrastructures and the business services that have been implemented on them. Many of these processes breakdown when business services are instantiated, recovered, moved, and re-instantiated on the same resources within the cloud infrastructure. These processes were not designed to work in such a high change environment.

BSL: Some industry experts have stated that interoperability and well-defined standards are the key to broad adoption of cloud computing. Do you agree or disagree? If you disagree, why?

DM: I don’t really agree. I think that typically most disruptive technologies are adopted organically by innovators and early adopters. These risk takers try to solve real business problems with the technology and help it gain a level of maturity so that others, less risk oriented, can adopt the technology as well as enable it to gain mainstream market adoption. Cloud computing isn’t any different. I believe via this organic adoption that de facto standards emerge from those technology leaders and can become successful solutions. I don’t see many examples of broad industry standards driving technology adoption from the tops down.

However, I do believe standards play a role. Once the technology has reached a level of mainstream adoption, there are usually several market leading vendors that emerge and have significant market penetration, but are likely not interoperable. This is where standards can provide the most value in bringing interoperability to solutions that have been successfully implemented and are delivering value. Trying to introduce standards too early in the market maturation process rarely gains any traction.

BSL: What would you identify as the most promising developments around cloud computing today? You are welcome to include your own company’s products, solutions, or technologies, but try to include other companies as well.

DM: First off, I don’t think we would be having this cloud computing discussion without the invention of x86 server virtualization pioneered by VMware. This is the key to the whole cloud computing dynamic infrastructure. Microsoft and Xen have followed with alternative hypervisors, so server virtualization is key.

Storage virtualization is also a significant component of the solution, so EMC, NetApp, HP, Hitachi, and others who are leaders in the storage market have also provided a significant element to the infrastructure.

Amazon should get credit for pioneering the idea of cloud computing with EC2, but this is far from addressing the needs of enterprise organizations and the complex business services they require to run their business on.

Finally, I have to mention Surgient. We also have been a pioneer in virtualization automation solutions, hosted clouds, as well as on-site private cloud implementations for many years. Our patented Surgient Virtual Automation Platform™ enables a virtualized infrastructure to become a cloud for enterprise uses via our automation capabilities—dynamic infrastructure orchestration, Policy-Driven Self-Service™, self management, business service centric approach, and capacity usage management and reporting. In addition, because we work with 70 of the world’s largest companies, with some of most complex computing needs, we have deep expertise in the implementation, operation, and maintenance of cloud computing infrastructures, and have developed significant process and best practices as well.

Closing

If any other virtualization or cloud computing executives wish to conduct a similar interview, feel free to contact me.

Readers, if this is something you like, let me know by speaking up in the comments. Thanks!

Tags: ,

3010: A MultiStore Primer

Wednesday, April 8, 2009 in Storage, Virtualization by slowe | 13 comments

This session describes NetApp’s MultiStore functionality. MultiStore is the name given to NetApp’s functionality for secure logical partitioning of network and storage resources. The presenters for the session are Roger Weeks, TME with NetApp, and Scott Gelb with Insight Investments.

When using MultiStore, the basic building block is the vFiler. A vFiler is a logical construct within Data ONTAP that contains a lightweight instance of the Data ONTAP multi-protocol server. vFilers provide the ability to securely partition both storage resources and network resources. Storage resources are partitioned at either the FlexVol or Qtree level; it’s recommended to use FlexVols instead of Qtrees. (The presenters did not provide any further information beyond that recommendation. Do any readers have more information?) On the network side, the resources that can be logically partitioned are IP addresses, VLANs, VIFs, and IPspaces (logical routing tables).

Some reasons to use vFilers would include storage consolidation, seamless data migration, simple disaster recovery, or better workload management. MultiStore integrates with SnapMirror to provide some of the functionality needed for some of these use cases.

MultiStore uses vFiler0 to denote the physical hardware, and vFiler0 “owns” all the physical storage resources. You can create up to 64 vFiler instances, and active/active clustered configurations can support up to 130 vFiler instances (128 vFilers plus 2 vFiler0 instances) during a takeover scenario.

Each vFiler stores its configuration in a separate FlexVol (it’s own root vol, if you will). All the major protocols are supported within a vFiler context: NFS, CIFS, iSCSI, HTTP, and NDMP. Fibre Channel is not supported; you can only use Fibre Channel with vFiler0. This is due to the lack of NPIV support within Data ONTAP 7. (It’s theoretically possible, then, that if/when NetApp adds NPIV support to Data ONTAP that Fibre Channel would be supported within vFiler instances.)

Although it is possible to move resources between vFiler0 and a separate vFiler instance, doing so may impact client connections.

Managing vFilers appears to be the current weak spot; you can manage vFiler instances using the Data ONTAP CLI, but vFiler instances don’t have an interactive shell. Therefore, you have to direct commands to vFiler instances via SSH or RSH or using the vFiler context in vFiler0. You access the vFiler context by prepending the “vfiler” keyword to the commands at the CLI in vFiler0. Operations Manager 3.7 and Provisioning Manager can manage vFiler instances; FilerView can start, stop, or delete individual vFiler instances but cannot direct commands to an individual vFiler. If you need to manage CIFS on a vFiler instance, you can use the Computer Management MMC console to connect remotely to that vFiler instance to manage shares and share permissions, just as you can with vFiler0 (assuming CIFS is running within the vFiler, of course).

IPspaces are a logical routing construct that allow each vFiler to have its own routing table. For example, you may have a DMZ vFiler and an internal vFiler, each with their own, separate routing table. Up to 101 IPspaces are supported per controller. You can’t delete the default IPspace, as it’s the routing table for vFiler0. It is recommended to use VLANs and/or VIFs with IPspaces as a best practice.

One of the real advantages of using MultiStore and vFilers is the data migration and disaster recovery functionality that it enables when used in conjunction with SnapMirror. There are two sides to this:

  • “vfiler migrate” allows you to move an entire vFiler instance, including all data and configuration, from one physical storage system to another physical storage system. You can keep the same IP address or change the IP address. All other network identification remains the same: NetBIOS name, host name, etc., so the vFiler should look exactly the same across the network after the migration as it did before the migration.
  • “vfiler dr” is similar to “vfiler migrate” but uses SnapMirror to keep the source and target vFiler instances in sync with each other.

It makes sense, but you can’t use “vfiler dr” or “vfiler migrate” on vFiler0 (the physical storage system). My own personal thought regarding “vfiler dr”: what would this look like in a VMware environment using NFS? There could be some interesting possibilities there.

With regard to security, a Matasano security audit was performed and the results showed that there were no vulnerabilities that would allow “data leakage” between vFiler instances. This means that it’s OK to run a DMZ vFiler and an internal vFiler on the same physical system; the separation is strong enough.

Other points of interest:

  • Each vFiler adds about 400K of system memory, so keep that in mind when creating additional vFiler instances.
  • You can’t put more load on a MultiStore-enabled system than a non-MultiStore-enabled system. The ability to create logical vFilers doesn’t mean the physical storage system can suddenly handle more IOPS or more capacity.
  • You can use FlexShare on a MultiStore-enabled system to adjust priorities for the FlexVols assigned to various vFiler instances.
  • As of Data ONTAP 7.2, SnapMirror relationships created in a vFiler context are preserved during a “vfiler migrate” or “vfiler dr” operation.
  • More enhancements are planned for Data ONTAP 7.3, including deduplication support, SnapDrive 5.0 or higher support for iSCSI with vFiler instances, SnapVault additions, and SnapLock support.

Some of the potential use cases for MultiStore include file services consolidation (allows you to preserve file server identification onto separate vFiler instances), data migration, and disaster recovery. You might also use MultiStore if you needed support for multiple Active Directory domains with CIFS.

UPDATE: Apparently, my recollection of the presenters’ information was incorrect, and FTP is not a protocol supported with vFilers. I’ve updated the article accordingly.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Introduction to “Nehalem” CPUs

Tuesday, April 7, 2009 in General by adelp | 9 comments

By Aaron Delp
Twitter: aarondelp

Hello everyone! It’s Aaron again. I’m sorry for falling off the radar for a bit. A new generation of Intel processors is upon us and I felt the need to come out of seclusion to share some recent findings regarding the new architecture. Today’s article will explore the new processor offerings. I will be following this up with one (or more depending on the length) about the memory architecture and interconnects.

There is one simple reason why I wrote this article. You can no longer pick a processor based on clock speed. The Nehalem processors have “levels” now and each level provides additional features and functionality lacking in the lower levels. You will need to be careful when choosing a processor if you are looking for certain features. Here is a quick table listing the models and the features:

Speed

Watts

Max Mem Speed

Turbo Mode and Hyper-Threading

X5570 (2.93GHz)

95W

1333 MHz

Yes

X5560 (2.80GHz)

95W

1333 MHz

Yes

X5550 (2.66GHz)

95W

1333 MHz

Yes

E5540 (2.53GHz)

80W

1066 MHz

Yes

E5530 (2.40GHz)

80W

1066 MHz

Yes

E5520 (2.26GHz)

80W

1066 MHz

Yes

E5506 (2.13GHz)

80W

800 MHz

No

E5504 (2.00GHz)

80W

800 MHz

No

E5502 (1.66GHz)

80W

800 MHz

No

I find the Max Memory Speed particularly interesting. As you will see in the next article, memory speed can get pretty complex very quickly. The more memory that is installed in the system, the lower the clock speed on the memory. The days of installing in matched pairs and forgetting about it are gone.

What is Turbo Mode and Hyper-Threading you ask? Hyper-Threading as far as I can tell (please leave feedback if this incorrect!) is the same old Hyper-Threading we knew and loved from past chipsets. Turbo mode is interesting though. Think of it as “Burst Mode” for processors. If your OS supports it, the CPU will increase the clock speed as long as you are within the thermal/power thresholds for the chip. The ability to go into Turbo mode depends on the number of active cores. If you are using most of the cores, the chip will be less likely to go into Turbo mode.

UPDATE: Keith from Intel has provided a great explanation of Turbo mode from a hardware perspective in the comments section. I wanted to include it here as a direct quote. Thanks Keith!

Turbo mode is mostly independent of OS support. On CPUs that support Turbo, it is implemented as the P0 p-state in the CPU. It looks & smells like a CPU that is simply running in the highest-frequency P-state. The PCU (power control unit) in Nehalem handles the rest.

Tags: , ,

Attending the Next-Generation VMware Launch Event

Tuesday, April 7, 2009 in Virtualization by slowe | 5 comments

UPDATE: Due to circumstances outside my control, I will not be attending the launch event. I’m very disappointed, but there was no other alternative. Hopefully Rick’s coverage will be sufficient.

Thanks to a good friend, I am happy to report that I will be attending the next-generation VMware launch event at VMware Headquarters in Palo Alto, CA on April 21. Look for full coverage here on my site. I’ll also try to provide real-time status updates on Twitter, where possible. I’m open to suggestions as to what medium would best suit everyone—more updates on Twitter with a full blog post afterward, or a constantly updated blog post? Let me know what you think.

Rick Scherer of VMwareTips.com will also be on-hand, and he’s hoping to be able to provide video coverage of the event as well.

This should be an exciting product launch, and I’m really looking forward to being present and providing up-to-date coverage. Don’t miss out!

Tags: , , ,

« Older entries