Although this does reflect App-V 5.1, it really did not have a huge impact on the decision matrix. Microsoft made some much needed updates to the sequencer, improved the 4.6 to 5.x converter and introduced the ability to run multiple scripts per event (I was really happy with this one!). While all of that improves the experience for those sequencing it doesn’t change the limitations that already existed.
I did update the graph to suggest using RunVirtual and prompt you to ask if it’s suitable. You will know if it’s suitable based on the application and it’s uses. Is the application global? Does everybody need the RunVirtual? Is RunVirtual required by a different App-V app using the same local app? Do I need a Connection Group in order to accommodate all that need this..it can get a little tricky to manage.
I also highlighted the option to Deliver with XenApp/RDS. If the application is not required online it may make more sense to publish it via XenApp or RDS and that decision point could be applied throughout the decision making process.
If you disagree with anything please comment.
I have to thank Aaron Parker for the awesome job he did redesigning my previous, awful Decision Matrix! Thanks, Aaron. I hope I didn’t mess it up too much making changes. Also a shout to Danny Clarke who made it even better again by adding a couple of extra decision points and making it much more streamlined. Thanks, fellas.
1.) COM+ : COM+ Decision Explanation
2.) Vendor Support: Vendor Support Explanation
3.) Machine Specific Licensing : Machine Specific Licensing Decision Explanation
4.) Boot Time Services : Boot Time Services Decision Explanation
5.) DCOM : DCOM Decision Explanation
6.) Drivers : Drivers Decision Explanation
7.) Middleware\Runtimes : Middleware/Runtimes Decision Explanation
8.) Add-ins and Links : Add-ins and Links Decision Explanation
9.) Application Performance: Application Performance Explanation
