Can anyone explain: What is application sequencing?
How different it is from applicaion packaging ?
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
I should probably leave this one for kkaminsk as he's more current. Or check this link:

http://www.softricity.com/products/sequencer.asp
Answered 05/09/2006 by: turbokitty
Sixth Degree Black Belt

Please log in to comment
0
It is very similar in terms of what you are essentially doing from a high level. You are preping an application for deployment via some sort of infrastructure. Instead of making a software installer you are making a virtual environment for your application. It is rather difficult to explain it much more than that because you are using two totally different technologies. I find Sequencing to be less technically complex than MSI packaging but you still rely on similar skill sets and troubleshooting techniques. Softricity used to push the idea that you could have almost anyone Sequence an application but I disagree saying for the most part it is easy but you still should have a packager do the job if you want it done right.
Answered 05/09/2006 by: kkaminsk
Ninth Degree Black Belt

Please log in to comment
0
I didn't like it at first but I have been supporting some large installations and implementing new ones. So I guess since I have moved mainly into app virtualization (though I still make MSIs) and I am biased because of that. I think it is great stuff and makes my job more simple but it is really hard to convey a technology unless you are using it. Yes you do trade your problems for new ones but I find that most applications virtualize more easily than repackaging or cusomizing the installation.

Application repair is so simple you'd wonder why you want fat installed apps. I can literally get a user up and running in seconds to a few minutes if their app breaks. Now the kicker is that if you client software that performs the virtualization is buggy then you got bigger problems. I found Softgrid 3.1.xxx to have issues after long periouds of operation but 3.2.xxx was solid. I still don't have much feedback about 4.0 so I can't really comment on it.

I think it is more than the flavor of the month when you see banks, major energy companies and healthcare companies running large implmentations of this product. I am willing to put my money that and a couple years or so you won't be able to work in a large corporate environment without seeing application virtualization. Remember Citrix was once considered a fad...
Answered 05/11/2006 by: kkaminsk
Ninth Degree Black Belt

Please log in to comment
0
You think you've got it bad? I contracted at a company that hadn't patched their workstations since XP SP1. Their patching solution broke and they couldn't decided who was responsible. Needless to say, they had massive virus outbreaks every week (usually the same virus over and over).

Having worked with Softgrid and MSI, I have to back kkaminsk. Virtualization on the desktop is wonky in theory, but works remarkably well. The TCO is lower than MSI and with Altiris entering the market, it can only get more popular.

It's the near-future of desktop management. It might not rule the roost ten years from now, but we should all be driving hover-cars by then to our jobs on the moon, so who cares?
Answered 05/11/2006 by: turbokitty
Sixth Degree Black Belt

Please log in to comment
0
Maybe I am over zelous with the adoption rate of App Virtualization. I still see companies desperately trying not to move off of Windows 2000 and others still only patching forward facing servers. I had one engagement where this medium sized company is finaly in the process of implementing desktop management practices that I was doing in 97. Oh well at least I can look forward to my hover car. [&:]
Answered 05/11/2006 by: kkaminsk
Ninth Degree Black Belt

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