[THIN] Re: if you could only choose one...
- From: Matt Kosht <matt.kosht@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2009 13:53:52 -0400
Also under Xenapp 5 with SA I believe even the Advanced Edition (needed
Enterprise Edition before that) now allows application virtualization.
On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 1:32 PM, Greg Reese <gareese@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> or use XenApp to virtualize your apps which runs just fine on 64Bit gear
> and is included in the priced of licensing XenApp already. Why spend for
> features you already paid for.
>
> Greg
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 12:28 PM, Andrew <andrew.wood@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>wrote:
>
>> App-v; separating apps out and creating a transportable app deployment
>> across devices (servers/desktops/laptops) is of greater benefit than 2008r2;
>> and I can migrate to that when appv goes 64bit
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On 19 Aug 2009, at 17:09, "Wilson, Christopher" <CMWilson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Windows 2008 R2 is 64-bit only. App-V is 32-bit only (presently). If
>> you had to pick one which would it be – 64-bit arch or app virtualization?
>> (and why?)
>>
>>
>>
>> 64bit means more memory and more users per server, but possibly some
>> compatibility issues
>>
>> App-V means less app conflicts and hence less silos, but 32 bit only.
>>
>>
>>
>> I’m planning for a Citrix farm upgrade and curious about your thoughts.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
Other related posts:
