I'm looking to see if anyone out there has had to support a mixed application virtualization environment. I'm being asked about it and I can see the advantage of one product virtualizing applications that another cannot do but is this really strategic for an organization? I can see the packaging team having to be proficient with two virtualization technologies, Windows Installer, and legacy installers so that's already a tall order to fill from a skill set standpoint. Do people see this as an effective way to keep applications virtual or has this become a skill set / management nightmare?
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
Hi,

We will probably have at least 2 virtualization technologies... Encapsulation and redirection... They both have their strengths and weaknesses, to together we will be able to use this technology in a wider breadth of applications.

I do get the look from management sometimes when it comes to the reasoning why not only one virt tech... But the promise of what the technologies can do for us will far out strip the overhead of learning how to package the different virt technologies...
Answered 03/17/2008 by: jfd3
Senior Yellow Belt

Please log in to comment
0
Hi,

Softgrid 4.5 is the best solution for the mixed application virtualization ENV. As it saves the cost as well as time and easy to deploy , sequence[to package] and testing of the applications.
[align=left] [/align]
Answered 03/25/2008 by: Randhir_T
Yellow Belt

Please log in to comment
0
More than one AV vendor product? No, but my customer has decided on mixed SoftGrid desktop implementation environments. For approx. 85% of the 'well connected' clients, the basic SoftGrid streaming implementation will be used. For the remaining 15%, SMS (already in place) will be used to deliver MSI Utility packaged SoftGrid-enabled apps to poorly connected, slow network connectivity clients where a majority of the client base needs the app. If only a few poorly connected clients need the app, a Helpdesk person will install the preconfigured MSI Utility packaged SoftGrid-enabled app.

Are there really customers out there that have the money to spend on multiple AV vendor solution implementations? I think MS's investment to implement / offer a non-streaming solution to SA customers was a big step in the 'right' direction. I'm not working with SoftGrid for TS so I haven't studied the ins / outs of its use, but I think that the MSI packaging for SoftGrid could cut the need for the SoftGrid streaming architecture as well.
Answered 03/25/2008 by: BadShadd
Orange Senior Belt

Please log in to comment
0
Well I know of a site that is running three solutions right now but that can be the nature of the beast in a larger organization where there might not be an overall architectural view and business units engage in the technology that they choose. I should say that I have also seen weird mixtures of technologies in government organizations such as a territorial or national governments.

The one idea I found interesting is to heavily invest in one virtualization solution and then use a backup virtualization solution that might be significantly different. For example use a full virtualization technology such as SoftGrid or Thinstall then use SVS for the situations where full isolation is a bad idea or maybe something the 4GB SoftGrid barrier causes a niche implementation scenario. It's still unlikely that you will get a 100% virtual application environment and you do pay more of a premium for the licensing. The other downside I find with that scenario is proficiency and the ability to attract talent. If you think it's hard to find an expert with virtualization technology X then try and find one that is an expert in more than one technology. Also the staff that can be effective with multiple technologies will probably be seeking a compensation premium from their employer as well.

I was curious to see how many people are doing this and I don't think many people are but it was interesting to talk to some people who are running such a configuration and finding out why they decided to run the configuration. It seems to be more of a political driver than a technical driver that causes these implementations but it could be more common as companies buy into application virtualization. An acquisition of another company could easily trigger this architectural situation.
Answered 03/28/2008 by: kkaminsk
Ninth Degree Black Belt

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