App-V 4.6 to 5.0 - Comparison Cheat Sheet
App-V 4.6 | App-V 5.0 |
Mount drive (Q:) on sequencer and client | No mount drive on sequencer or client |
RTSPS, RTSP, HTTP, HTTPS and SMB streaming | HTTP, HTTPS and SMB streaming |
.SFT package file format | .APPV package file format |
.OSD | .XML Dynamic Deployment/User Configuration |
Sfttray.exe for application launch | Application .exe called directly |
Dynamic Suite Composition (DSC) | Application Connection Groups (ACG) |
Shared Read Only Cache | Shared Content Store |
SFTFS.FSD cache file | Flat file structure in %ProgramData% |
Default isolation of applications | Default isolation of application apart from Virtual Application Extensions |
Management Server MMC Console | Management Server Silverlight web console |
Windows XP, Vista, 7 and 8 desktop OS support | Windows 7 and 8 desktop OS support |
Windows Server 2003, 2008 and 2008 R2 Server OS Support | Windows Server 2008 R2 and 2012 Server OS Support |
SFTMIME/SFTTRAY commands on client and SFTSEQUENCER command line for sequencer | PowerShell commands on client, sequencer and server |
Sftlog.txt and Event Log error reporting | Event Log – Applications and Services Logs |
Non Optimised Streaming (Default) or Feature Block definition | On Demand – Stream Faults Streaming(Default) or Feature Block definition |
Application reboot simulated by Sequencer | Application reboot physically actioned during Sequencing |
User based targeting only (App-V Full Infrastructure) | User and computer based targeting (App-V Full Infrastructure) |
Package upgrades deployed to all users | Phased package upgrades |
Comments
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
No problems!Anonymous
January 01, 2003
Glad you found it useful!Anonymous
January 01, 2003
Let us know how you get on HansMJ!Anonymous
January 01, 2003
It sure is a great release Yannara! Check out this post for details on where to download and some other useful links around the App-V 5.0 release: blogs.technet.com/.../app-v-5-0-rtm-now-released.aspxAnonymous
January 01, 2003
"Management Server Silverlight web console" Why would Microsoft choose to use Silverlight at this point?Anonymous
January 01, 2003
Hi Rich, Any changes with the direction of Silverlight likely would of occurred somewhere into the development cycle of the App-V 5.0 release, the investment would probably have been significant enough to warrant the decision to stay with a Silverlight platform rather than try and switch to an alternativeAnonymous
January 01, 2003
Virtualisation is core and still takes place, VFS and COM is an basic example of this. Which issues are you facing with .ini and .cfg files? I have customers working with Sybase and Oracle software in App-V 5.0 which have both these files types with no issues. It would be great to hear about your issue adding shortcuts as it is definitely not impossible, shortcuts are the same as locally installed applications and just call the application directly from cache? For example many customer create shortcuts via Group Policy or via XenApp, completely independent to the App-V shortcuts inside the package. I'm not trying to defend App-V as a product rather understand what limitations you are actually referring to as a lot of the points you raised I have either never heard of or I am failing to understand what you actually mean.Anonymous
November 12, 2012
OMG this looks so good :PAnonymous
November 14, 2012
i played around with v5 beta and very earger to test this RTM version out.Anonymous
October 09, 2013
Actually App-v 5.0 is worse then 4.6. Why microsoft calls it virtualisation is a mystery to me. It is not. The applications gets published to a fixed location on the client system. Any application which uses config files (like ini's or cfg's) will have lots of problems running. Try adding a shortcut. it is impossible since it is not inside the appv package file but is located in the xml. As a result any tool which will call for the appv package file will not see those shortcuts. In short. App-v 5.0 is a big nightmare and I would not recommend using it until Microsoft gets it act together. technically it might be a very nice tool. But funcionally it is a nightmareAnonymous
February 24, 2014
These are Good Comparison and better understand the difference between both releases.
Thank you
PKBAnonymous
March 11, 2014
Good Comparison.. nice overview of all the main features that have changed from the previous version...Thanks