|
Dilbert As gently caress posted:https://labs.vmware.com/flings/vmware-os-optimization-tool Warning: Test before deploying these optimizations. Some optimizations may break things like Adobe Reader updates in certain environments, as it disables some services that applications may depend on.
|
#
¿
Aug 5, 2014 23:56
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 8, 2024 19:40 |
|
|
Moey posted:Nothing specific, any new features/performance benefits that anyone found useful I finally got us upgraded to 5.3 less than 6 months ago, time to start planning this upgrade... You can do RDS hosted apps and desktops. That's a pretty big addition.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 14, 2014 23:42
|
|
|
ThinApp runs locally and uses local resources; XenApp (App Remoting) runs on the server and uses server resources. ThinApp also is a "well maybe it will work with my app," whereas XenApp apps install locally and work fine as long as they're compatible with server OS. They're not the same thing, and if you try to replace XenApp with ThinApp, I have to wonder why you ever used XenApp in the first place.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 2, 2014 01:51
|
|
|
Saying XenApp and ThinApp are the same thing is like saying XenApp and an .msi are the same thing. Why even do ThinApp if you're going to do physical PCs with lots of resources? Just setup SCCM or Tivoli or whatever ESD you want and install packages normally. Doing ThinApps to physical PCs makes very little sense. At least with VDI you could say you wanted an app strategy for non-persistent machines without having to update the golden image. Not to mention there's no solid deployment strategy for ThinApps unless you're doing GPOs to install the .msi it creates, or running thinreg.exe at logon or something. ThinApp is terrible. That said, if you have no reason to leverage server resources/mobility requirements/etc., then don't go XenApp either. Seriously, just install apps with a normal enterprise software deployment tool. If you really love VMware, Mirage makes more sense than ThinApp for physical PCs.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 2, 2014 02:08
|
|
|
ThinApp everything was a strategy pitched like 3-4 years ago as the panacea to app delivery. In practice, you'll find them a pain to manage and troubleshoot, if you can even get your app working. Even VMware is giving up on thinapp except in niche cases like where you need to run old versions of IE or multiple versions of Java; that's why they bought CloudVolumes. It's just not a great tool for widespread usage. Maybe if you're trying it for one or two apps, it's whatever, that's fine. It's an okay tactical tool. I can tell you any consultant that tells you ThinApp is a good strategy for app deployment is either ignorant or trying to just sell you something. If you're just trying to play a political game and say its not software deployment, use VMware Mirage and say its layering.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 2, 2014 03:08
|
|
|
Nitr0 posted:I find it hard to believe that VMware is "giving up" on thinapp when they literally just released updates to view, workspace and thinapp to integrate the whole shebang together less than a month ago. Here are the last 2 years worth of release notes for ThinApp. Tell me that they're committed to its development based on reading these exciting changes: https://www.vmware.com/support/thinapp4/doc/releasenotes_thinapp501.html https://www.vmware.com/support/thinapp4/doc/releasenotes_thinapp50.html https://www.vmware.com/support/thinapp4/doc/releasenotes_thinapp473.html If ThinApp was so successful, please tell me why VMware needed CloudVolumes as their new application delivery tool? That's also after they bought Wanova (now Mirage) to try to fix their mistake with trying to tell people to use ThinApps everywhere. quote:The primary driver behind this is Citrix printing issues and remote regions. We've had citrix printing issues for years whereas thinapp just seems to work with all our specialized apps we've tried. The remote regions are sometimes on 10Mb links with 40/50ms latency and citrix just isn't cutting it. Having a local "install" looks like it will fix these problems. VDI or RDS may not be the way to go. That's fine, go physical, but don't use ThinApp as your application tool. Just install stuff natively or use Mirage, or basically anything other than ThinApp. quote:What am I missing here man? How big is your org and how many users did you use it with? What specific problems were you having or having trouble doing? If you don't want to take my word for it, that's fine. I can tell you, from experience picking up the pieces from clients that tried it, that using ThinApp as your primary application deployment strategy is a bad idea. If you're such a big environment, you probably have MDOP and have App-V for free. If you want to do app virtualization that way, at least do it for free. (Still a bad idea.) quote:Please go into more detail about your problems because I'm looking for any reason to not use this but using words like " 3 - 4 years ago " and vague things like it's a pain to manage and troubleshoot isn't specific enough. How was Metaframe 4.5 4 years ago? It was poo poo. Ask me how I know. I've already told you multiple times the problems ThinApp has, but I'll repeat them in detail: - Your package is virtualized and no longer native. You no longer get to use native tools to troubleshoot or work on your application once it's a ThinApp. Need to change something? It's not easy. Good luck having your help desk work on a ThinApp other than the most basic of "delete the sandbox." - Your application will most likely be unsupported by the vendor if it's in a virtualized container. Your vendor will not know how to troubleshoot it, and you'll need to reproduce it on a normal install. - Your application might not even work. The success ratio is hard to determine. You could do an application assessment and use something like Citrix's AppDNA to help determine this, but it's still very much "hit or miss." - Virtualizing an application into a container is not as easy as installing it on a server and then presenting it via Terminal Services (or deploying via SCCM or whatever ESD tool); there are compatibility issues and other problems you will run into trying to get apps to behave gracefully in this kind of setup. - Your app may not work as expected. Don't set it up just right, or just plain rely on something ThinApp can't support? You're out of luck. Shell extensions are a nice example here. Honestly, the fact that you thought XenApp and ThinApp were the same shows you don't have a very strong understanding of the technology in this space. I would advise you to bring in a partner to work with to determine a feasible strategy. I highly doubt any of them will tell you that ThinApp as your primary deployment strategy is a good idea. Is ThinApp okay for one-off applications or niche usage? Sure, but don't bank on it for your app strategy. But, by all means, continue down that path and report back in a year.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 2, 2014 23:35
|
|
|
Nitr0 posted:Will do. Most of your predictions in this thread over the last three years have been way off base anyways so I'll let you know how it goes. Thanks for encouraging me to read my two year old posts, that was fun. Couldn't find an example of an incorrect prediction though. SSO requiring a rewrite: check. Windows still being used over VCSA for majority: check. vCloud Director sucking: check. XenServer being for poors: check. Sorry you're leading your company into failure. V  V
|
|
#
¿
Oct 3, 2014 00:34
|
|
|
Nitr0 posted:As he points out supposed flaws in thinapp from 4 years ago. ThinApp hasn't changed significantly in several years. I even gave you the release notes. Good luck with your ThinApp as a packaging tool/software distribution strategy. You're my new goto reference case on people not understanding technology and biting hook-line-and-sinker on the vendor's pitch. Try to find a reference case of any company successfully using ThinApp as their primary software distribution tool, or as a replacement for XenApp. three fucked around with this message at 00:06 on Oct 4, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Oct 4, 2014 00:02
|
|
|
Nitr0 posted:Why would I give a gently caress if it works in our use case. You must be the worst contractor and end up picking solutions without giving any thought to actual requirements for your customer. Based on your total generalizations and lack of understanding people must really love you. What is my fandom for again? You should care because it's a dumb strategy and bad software. Also, if you're as large of a company as your claim, you likely have App-V for free. You're pretty sold though, so good luck! Nitr0 posted:We've started some preliminary testing to replace our xenapp with thinapp and this poo poo looks too good to be true. For only one app we can remove 40 xenapp servers and replace it with a couple file stores and stream a thinapp with better performance and easier management. What's the downside that I'm missing? 
three fucked around with this message at 01:48 on Oct 4, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Oct 4, 2014 01:23
|
|
|
That's via Horizon View. You wanted to do it to physical machines. Your opinion isn't going to change, so I'm not going to keep trying to tell you that ThinApp to physical is not a great solution given all of the options available. Go for it. It's your environment. I'm sure you can make it 'work'. Maybe if you do a good job you can move to the actual IT team and not have to try to circumvent the operational rules with bad software.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 4, 2014 20:53
|
|
|
Nitr0 posted:Man, you are argumentative. Moving goalposts and all that. Physical, virtual. No drat difference. You ask for any company using thinapp in production, there's a clear as day example of 800 thinapps used in a 15billion a year company and you dismiss it. Yes, there is no difference between virtual and physical. PS Thanks for my first custom av. I've finally made it on the SomethingAwful forums!
|
|
#
¿
Oct 6, 2014 19:14
|
|
|
A lot of Tintri's leadership recently quit.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2015 01:02
|
|
|
Zerto is really awesome, and you should definitely look at it.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 2, 2015 22:09
|
|
|
For the Citrix/vCenter SSL thing, just follow this guide: http://www.carlstalhood.com/controller-77/#vcenter Usually when it doesn't work, it was tried through IE and IE was not launched as an Admin and didn't get put in the right place.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 17, 2016 16:17
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 8, 2024 19:40 |
|
|
1000101 posted:Still there, just unlikely to get invoked. There is a setting in Horizon View that allows reenabling it easily if desired in a VDI environment at least. Can even do it per pool, etc.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 12, 2016 01:30
|
|