App-v and the scope of applications RRS feed

  • General discussion

  • I just tried to sequence SQL Express 2008 with tools. No-luck (well, I had to try...). (4.5 RTM)

    I have read the sequencing guidelines, and just read the deployment guidelines as well and somethings still annoy me.

    1. I really want to be able to sequence a SQL-instance. Many bad (poorly performing, deeply integrated with other applications) applications that causes headaches (headaches in deployment, useability due to conflicts and stability) uses SQL-server as an offline data-storage.

    Now, I wasn't thinking that 4.5 would  fix this. The DSC was a huge step to start excluding Office as an part of all OS bases, but I realised pretty early on that any issues I had with MSDE/ SQL Express (2k5) would still exist. I just wanted to try SQL Express (2k8) to see if works, perhaps I missed something? 

    (ok lets be honest, if the MS CRM Outlook client wouldn't be so distant from the windows installer team and would actually build an application that would be deployable in a somewhat automatic way - my eager for this could go away. But they aren't. And any other app-vendor that uses Outlook integration and a SQL-server locally installed have somewhat the same problems. Some do it better, others just admit that it performs poorly)

    2. Some basic functionality is still lacking. The explorer-integration would greatly be appreciated (think about those right-click menus that seems to be APP-V teams ignored way of accessing applications).

    Why? Well, I look like an idiot trying to sell a tool and make people use it and advice them NOT to sequence anything with a right-click menu.
    Even in the Guidelines for sequencing Winzip is classified as a simple application, and yet the right-click menu is not there.
    Yes I know why, but the obstacle should be resolved, not over looked.

    Why am I complaining (whining I would say...?) ? Well, it seems that the scope of applications is becoming rather limited. APP-V isn't the way to deliver applications. Even if fully utilized for a desktop environment, there will be loads of applications that has to be installed locally to even pass a UAT. Now, who would setup a server infrastructure dedicated to delivering APP-V, when not all applications can be delivered?

    Yes, many have the SCCM infrastructure in place - and for those customers its great. The stand-alone method offers a middleway, but then you just get the packaging, not the delivery (and who wants the packaging when loads of stuff goes out of scope due to functionality missing?)

    Where do I see APP-V go? Well, first of all it should fix 64-bit support. Desktop-client is an acceptable flaw that there isn't 64-bit support, but the TS-client could really give people the benefit of a 64-bit environment. (my mind goes to IFS-applications that uses a lot of memory).
     Then what? Well, if any of my wanted features should be on my roadmap the second point is probably not easy but could really increase useability.

    APP-V had a huge head-start I would say in terms of virtual applications. That head-start is pretty much wiped out.
    Its a great way of resolving conflicts, but the scope of applications is becoming to narrow and the delivery almost requires that SCCM is in place.

    What has APP-V done right? Many things, but the really bad annoyances are still there.

    (btw, when is that information for Windows 7 showing up?) 

    Thursday, January 15, 2009 10:31 AM

All replies