Microsoft App-V Reviews

Working with legacy software is my only use case for Microsoft App-V because the company I work for has many old software that are used for different tasks. Additionally, the previously mentioned old developers are no longer with the company, either retired or moved to other places, so it was necessary to find a way to make those applications work from old compatibility operating systems to the new ones. That was the study case and implementation of Microsoft App-V inside the enterprise where I'm currently working.

My use case for Microsoft App-V is that I'm using it now, but I'm not the one who is maintaining the platform; it was handed over to others. I'm just using the applications that are published on those servers for my VDI solution.

The most valuable feature of Microsoft App-V that I found is the possibility to bring old software back to life and publish it for users to do their jobs using those applications. Additionally, this came free with an agreement with SCCM since it did not require any additional licenses; it was an add-on to SCCM when the enterprise acquired the solution.

One of the latest releases allowed for easy publishing via SCCM, making it quite flexible and easy to maintain. Once you package one app, it can be delivered to many users, creating a win-win situation because if it was packed in a capsule, the interaction with the user was minimal. The users could not break the app or ask for support because there was no support; they simply had this app in a container that would function correctly, without altering the content.

The downside is that not all software worked perfectly due to how they were written—as either machine or user context—which impacted how applications could be delivered. In a virtual environment with many users on the same machine, surprises could happen.

I utilize the feature of Microsoft App-V for running multiple versions of applications concurrently, where they are pushed by SCCM. We can have different populations with different versions published simultaneously, either through SCCM or Microsoft App-V. However, I'm currently contemplating whether the enterprise I'm in still uses the old App-V infrastructure or if they have completely switched to SCCM packages, as they have multiple personnel for managing SCCM and only had three individuals for the Microsoft App-V infrastructure.

The main use cases for Microsoft App-V nowadays are mainly for legacy support. In the past, it was also the overall deployment tool.

Microsoft App-V is a simple, very good working product that just works. It's starting to age, but it still is one of the better products available.

The specific area of virtualization in Microsoft App-V keeps the application separate from the local OS without deploying unwanted files.

I have utilized Microsoft App-V's feature for running multiple versions of an application concurrently. This capability helps when migrating from version one to version two of software, as it allows easily pointing the software to people who need the current or next version. It usually works seamlessly as long as there are no services involved.

Using Microsoft App-V for virtual application distribution across a network has definitely helped customers with their business continuity plans. It works very stably, meaning that if there's an issue, things can be quickly switched around. It can be moved to a local system, to an end-user system, or used in VDI. If Microsoft App-V is working, it usually works in all systems, making it flexible. Even if there's an issue and the VDI environment is not working, it can easily be deployed to another environment or to the end user, and the customers can keep working with the application. From their standpoint, it is a very robust system.

Microsoft App-V brings measurable benefits in terms of improvement in operational cost because it is a well-defined solution. There are many best practices available on how to use it. The costs of keeping it running are limited and easy to quantify. The system resources needed to keep it running and especially to make new ones are very limited, and as that is even starting to be phased out, it keeps the companies running without hidden costs.

I have used Microsoft App-V for more than 10 years in the past, but my company currently does not use it because the systems for application visualization here are a bit expensive.

In general, I think application virtualization is not effective because technology has changed. Currently, there is no longer a proper way to stream applications, which is a significant issue because virtualizing an application requires many changes every time, especially with security concerns when needing to integrate certificates into applications.

Business discussions often involve a resistance to change applications frequently, as they require automatic updates directly within the application without causing outages.

The situation with Microsoft App-V usage is challenging because it requires substantial infrastructure management and numerous features to identify and resolve issues, such as cache clearance and ensuring that all packages are correctly signed.

This has led us to search for other solutions; we are considering using FlexApp from Liquidware, but the licensing is quite costly.

Additionally, over 95% of our applications run on Citrix, and we are looking to transition to application layering, which also has its complications and requires significant management.

There seems to be a lack of good solutions available on the market, and some technologies need to be reevaluated, potentially considering older technologies since Citrix has also shifted its model, requiring installations on a master rather than streaming, which hampers the identification of issues with old applications still in production.

From my experience with Microsoft App-V, the feature I liked the most is the streaming.

I have been using Microsoft App-V for quite some time, and I can describe my use cases, which include various applications that enhance productivity.

What I appreciate best about Microsoft App-V are its user-friendly features that simplify application management, although I did encounter some issues when troubleshooting.

We use the solution for the Docker container.

It is easy to scale. You can quickly deploy additional instances. Rollbacks are easy because there is an automatic backup every hour. Deploying the application is straightforward and efficient.

The solution is useful for deploying applications.

We can deploy applications incredibly fast. The implementation time is really fast. I like the way the Sequencer works. The publication and management console are really helpful. We switch from the classic MSI through SCCM deployment to App-V with an in-house publication server. The delivery time has decreased by 40% to 45%.

We are integrators. We integrate this product.

We use this solution to deploy applications to end-users in a very fast, secure manner, and in an isolated container.

The most interesting and powerful feature for us is the fact that we can upgrade any kind of app instantly.

We like that we can deploy apps, both globally or per-user.

Also, that the applications follow the user. For example, if the end-user connects to a different station and the application is published for him, the application will follow him no matter where he is.

We can run scripts on different triggers for when an application is published, unpublished, or when a package is added or removed.

It's very flexible.