Hey Hey,

Just wondering if anyone has any experience comparing the products? I've read the excellent comparison matrix from Ruben Spruijt which in my opinion seems to state that App-V is a better, more mature technology.

Anyone have any real world experience?

I get the feeling that XenApp is a glorified isolation tool - alarm bells started ringing when Ruben's matrix stated that regression testing "may" be needed with XenApp, as well as "potential" issues for cohabitation. this worries me a lot.

Effectively, I've been dying to get App-V into this company for a long period, but due to a deteriorating relationship with MS, the powers that be will try everything they can to choose the non- MS product. I need to be able to prove that App-V is by far and away the better product. The fact that it's bundled with MDOP from a licensing POV doesn't help matters in the slightest.

Any thoughts or suggestions?

Thanks
0 Comments   [ + ] Show Comments

Comments

Please log in to comment

Rating comments in this legacy AppDeploy message board thread won't reorder them,
so that the conversation will remain readable.

Answers

0
If you are using TS: App-v is free and included in 2008 ts cal
Answered 11/05/2009 by: Ment
Senior Yellow Belt

Please log in to comment
0
YOu still need to license each user for $10 a head. In our case thats about 50k a year. The xenapp solution is coming in way way under budget at the moment.

Whats the difference between the actual virtualisation technology though? Is App-V a superior product, and if so WHY?
Answered 11/05/2009 by: dm1
Blue Belt

Please log in to comment
0
I would say App-V is a much more complete solution by fully isolating applications and has a fair bit of functionality exposed for those who like to tweak their applications. I recently had a friend who is supporting a large XenApp environment (20,000+ users) mention the Citrix solution as lacking and not very complex. He basically said either your app works with it or it doesn't. They are in the process of migrating towards App-V as the solution of choice for their environment now that 64-bit is on the table with App-V 4.6.

I would say App-V is the place to be from a community / market share standpoint. I've talked to some packaging outsourcing shops and all have said App-V is the most common virtualization solution their customers ask for. I would say overall App-V is a good product but I am a bit biased toward the solution. I think ThinApp would be something to consider as an alternative if management has their heart set on a non-MS solution.
Answered 11/09/2009 by: kkaminsk
Ninth Degree Black Belt

Please log in to comment
0
Appreciated as always Kevin.

I had the argument in a meeting recently that I "know" that App-V is a better product, in that if you can't get an app to work, it's more customizable - sort of like the "art of packaging an MSI". I stated that XenApp was "just" a glorified isolation tool, but I couldn't put forward the technical reason of why App-V is a more advanced product. Is this something you can elaborate on? The only thing I could come up with was mention the "SystemGuard" Bubble but I haven't had the chance to research the differences properly. On the surface, we're talking folder and registry redirection only.

I don't know if you've read this app virt comparison matrix? http://www.brianmadden.com/blogs/rubenspruijt/archive/2009/06/28/application-virtualization-solutions-overview-and-feature-compare-matrix-v2-2.aspx but imo, seems to paint App-V in a better light without elaborating on the lower technical reasons. I'd really love to know why!
Answered 11/09/2009 by: dm1
Blue Belt

Please log in to comment
0
What are you paying for Xenapp? I had a client move to App-V because it was considerably cheaper, but I didn't hear actual numbers.
Answered 11/09/2009 by: turbokitty
Sixth Degree Black Belt

Please log in to comment
0
We currently have ~600 citrix licenses. Apparently (we're still to get it in writing), they're going to allow us to use this existing licesning model to service 4000 users concurrently. I'll believe it when I see it. It's an existing sunk cost for us anyway because we service ~500 users at various remote sites. If that gets signed off we're literally looking at 0 for XenApp vs ~50k p.a for App-V.
Answered 11/09/2009 by: dm1
Blue Belt

Please log in to comment
0
How is App-V going to cost more? If you buy the RDS license (new terminal server license) it is included as part of the license and I don't think you can buy older CALs after September 1, 2009.

At a lower level App-V supports services, will have x64 support in h1 2009 (ok yes not quite available but in Release Candidate right now), better streaming (not needed for terminal server), better localization (if you are a multinational or non-english country) and App-V will isolate beyond file and registry (COM, Mutex, Semaphore etc...) which I know Citrix doesn't necessarily do but I am not sure what Citrix actually does beyond file and registry. If the desktop ends up being a support requirement then I would say App-V has many more deployment options.
Answered 11/15/2009 by: kkaminsk
Ninth Degree Black Belt

Please log in to comment
0
In terms of the licensing component, we only own so many current TS licenses. We'd have to purchase additional MS licenses and the MDOP license anyway.We have an EA with MS, and they've quoted us on a 3 year subscription period. Still waiting for Citrix to come back with a solid "in writing" offer w.r.t their effectively "free" license.

I've been trialling this for two days now and of the 4 apps compared, App-V is winning hands down in terms of the technology. XenApp is a bit painful if I'm honest. The interface is OK but trying to figure out what registry is installed and what isolation rules to set up is problematic.

NO idea how I'm giong to put a business case forward to pay for App-V at this rate. It's rather annoying, because I'll be the one fiddling around with Citrix as a result.
Answered 11/16/2009 by: dm1
Blue Belt

Please log in to comment
0
Are you deploying App-V to the desktop? If no then SA is not required you just need the 2008 RDS CALs which I think you'll have to buy anyway if you are short on TS licenses unless I am missing something there.
Answered 11/19/2009 by: kkaminsk
Ninth Degree Black Belt

Please log in to comment
0
Yep. My architect assures me that if you intend on streaming eventually to a desktop, even over TS then you do indeed need an MDOP license.

For what it's worth, the PoC has been pretty successful in that we've proved the technologies work, but to me App-V is the clear winner. Applications virtualise easier, are more customizable and overall you have a much better chance of virtualising a greater percentage of applications.

Incidentally, I'm considering basing a business case for App Virt around Windows 7 and a next generation MOE. Do you know of any real hard facts around "virtualising for Win7 vs re-packaging for Win7". Essentially I need to show how App Virt is going to save $$$, and not only in packaging effort. there needs to be some convincing on how this will actually aid a migration project. Hmmmm..
Answered 11/19/2009 by: dm1
Blue Belt

Please log in to comment
Answer this question or Comment on this question for clarity