Udostępnij za pośrednictwem

Global Registry State Changes in App-V 5.0

  • Artykuł

This post has moved here

Comments

  • Anonymous
    January 01, 2003
    Hi Guys, appreciate you sharing your thoughts and I do hear you loud and clear. However I guess the thinking is data written to HKLM isn't considered roaming data the same way %LOCALAPPDATA% isn't. I know many applications are not written this way however best practice would remain that applications which have data that needs to roam should make sure these changes go to either HKCU or %APPDATA%
  • Anonymous
    January 01, 2003
    Again I do understand the challenges but imagine Paint.NET was locally installed via .msi, we would have the same challenge as the setting would write to HKLM anyway. In App-V 4.x it would of went to a global .pkg, which I never saw anybody roaming. At least we store the non-admin change in HKCU which neither .msi or App-V 4.x would? Regarding the other the behaviours you mentioned, again I hear you loud and clear, all I can say is they are all on the radar and some have already been addressed in SP2. Appreciate the feedback in any respect though as it's all helpful!
  • Anonymous
    February 05, 2014
    In a previous post we talked about state changes with App-V packages and how these changes were stored
  • Anonymous
    February 05, 2014
    Thamin, Administrators are real people too. Yeah, people shouldn't normally be logged in as admins to run Paint.Net, but if they do I can't think of one good reason to treat the app related data any differently because they are an admin. The changes should follow the user regardless of whether logged in as an admin.
  • Anonymous
    February 05, 2014
    Thamin, I couldn't agree with Tim more, this makes no sense, especially in the case where we need these changes to folow the user (roaming profiles or a Persona Management tool. Just like saving app file changes in the program directory to appdatalocal. Really don't undertand the logic in either one of those changes. But as always, thank you for taking the time to post the information.
  • Anonymous
    February 05, 2014
    The comment has been removed
  • Anonymous
    February 06, 2014
    @Thamim, I happen to agree with you 100%, but as admins for large enterprises we are forced to support applications (in-house and vendor supplied) that rarely adhere to those best practices. 5.x includes some great new features, but defending the limitations to your management is very tough...its an upgrade where we lose support for allowing writes to the program directory (I am aware of the PVAD work-around), no roaming of program directory updates, no roaming of HKLM updates for admins, no support for executing a app from a network share (granting rights to computer accounts to a business share is NOT a viable solution), terrible publishing performance, subpar caching performance, no support for roaming profiles (glad this was fixed with SP2), and I am sure I am forgetting a few more.
  • Anonymous
    April 01, 2014
    CoW stands for Copy on Write and it’s a concept discussed in depth in our App-V 5 SP2 Application