Click ‘n’ run. It seems like such a simple concept. Surf up to a Web page, select the desired application from a list, and
click. Voila! Microsoft Word appears on your desktop. Or Excel, or Adobe Photoshop… you name it.
[ Symantec SVS won an InfoWorld Technology of the Year award. See the slideshow to view all winners in the platforms category. ]
In practice, click ‘n’ run is a nightmare to implement. Setting aside the licensing issues (and they are legion), the fact
remains that delivering traditional fat client applications over the Internet is a technological hurdle on the scale of enabling
pigs to fly. First, you have to package the code in a way that allows it to run without actually installing anything. That’s
where virtualization comes in. Then you need to find a way to deliver the bits to the end-user without choking their network
connection or leaving them helpless when they no longer have access to the distribution point. Here streaming and caching
are the keys.
Previous attempts at Web-based application distribution have focused mostly on kiosk-style computing, using a virtual machine
or terminal session running on a back-end server to deliver a “screen-scraped” UI to the remote user. However, with the emergence
of application virtualization solutions from Softricity (now part of Microsoft), Altiris (now part of Symantec), and Thinstall,
the industry is poised for an explosion of new and potentially revolutionary delivery models.
These three solutions virtualize the interaction between Windows programs and the Windows OS resources they depend on, including
the file system and system registry, allowing them to run in isolation from the underlying desktop. (For the differences in
how they go about it, see my writeup on application and desktop virtualization in "Virtualization: Under the hood.") Combine the virtualization capabilities with streaming servers, as two of the vendors have done, and click 'n' run, on-demand
application deployment is just a step or two away.
What makes application virtualization so compelling is its immunity to the very issues that torpedoed the kiosk solutions.
For starters, virtualized applications are modular. Though streamed by default, virtualized applications can be configured
for offline use, either through caching or by simply copying the application image to the client. And though isolated from
the local system (because the application’s registry access and private file set are virtualized), they can still interact
with local resources, seamlessly accessing the PC’s storage and print devices, for instance.
But despite having the right general plumbing, none of these first-generation solutions is designed specifically with a subscription-based
computing model in mind. Microsoft SoftGrid and Thinstall Virtualization Suite are still aimed at internal enterprise deployment,
whereas Symantec SVS Pro -- by virtue of its integration with a streaming server component from partner AppStream -- is closer
to the goal of a true click ‘n’ run format. All Symantec needs to do is work out the optimization kinks.
It’s worth noting that, although the focus of SoftGrid is still internal, the 800-pound gorilla in Redmond has everything
it needs to deliver a future Office suite via the Web. The future of software distribution is subscription-based click ‘n’
run; the question is no longer if, but when. The three platforms reviewed here are helping pioneer the transition.
 |
| The Bottom Line |
Symantec SVS Pro 2.1 Symantec, symantec.com
|
Good 7.5 |
 |
| criteria |
score |
weight |
| Management |
8 |
25% |
 |
| Scalability |
8 |
25% |
 |
| Setup |
7 |
20% |
 |
| Usability |
7 |
20% |
 |
| Value |
7 |
10% |
 |
|
 |
Cost: SVS Client free for private/student use; $55 per client for commercial use (includes streaming support)
Platforms: Requires Windows Server 2003 (for AppStream); supports Windows 2000, XP, and Vista as clients
Bottom Line: SVS gains in partner AppStream a much needed streaming capability to support its already robust virtualization layer. The
combined solution allows applications to be launched from a Web browser, and headless services are supported. However, the
level of integration between the OEM components is imperfect and simple deployment tasks require too many steps, not to mention
the slow initial response time for virtualized applications. Still, it’s the closest thing to “click ‘n run” on the market
today.
|
 |
About our Reviews and Scoring Methodology
|
|
 |
| The Bottom Line |
Microsoft SoftGrid 4.2 Microsoft, microsoft.com
|
Good 7.4 |
 |
| criteria |
score |
weight |
| Management |
8 |
25% |
 |
| Scalability |
8 |
25% |
 |
| Setup |
7 |
20% |
 |
| Usability |
6 |
20% |
 |
| Value |
8 |
10% |
 |
|
 |
Cost: Free to Microsoft Software Assurance Program customers
Platforms: Requires Windows Server 2003 with Active Directory; supports Windows 2000, XP, Vista and Windows Terminal Services as clients
Bottom Line: SoftGrid has changed little since our previous review. Strong points are tight integration with Active Directory and a well-optimized
streaming model. However, it still suffers from usability quirks and an overly complex sequencing process, and it lacks support
for headless services. Nevertheless, Microsoft’s acquisition of SoftGrid, and its decision to de-couple the client from the
server, point to an important role for the underlying technology in future Microsoft products and services.
|
 |
About our Reviews and Scoring Methodology
|
|
 |
| The Bottom Line |
Thinstall Virtualization Suite 3.2 Thinstall, thinstall.com
|
Good 7.1 |
 |
| criteria |
score |
weight |
| Management |
7 |
25% |
 |
| Scalability |
7 |
25% |
 |
| Setup |
7 |
20% |
 |
| Usability |
8 |
20% |
 |
| Value |
6 |
10% |
 |
|
 |
Cost: $5,000 for Virtualization Suite; $39 per node for deployed applications
Platforms: Supports most variations of Windows 2000, XP, 2003 and Vista
Bottom Line: Bottom Line: Thinstall continues to deliver a no-frills solution that makes the process of packaging and deploying virtualized
applications almost trivially simple. The completely self-contained virtualization environment requires no client agent or
back-end server, and it delivers excellent runtime performance. However, the acquisition of competitors Softricity and Altiris
has left Thinstall as the lone pioneer in a rapidly maturing market. Previously overlooked deficiencies, like the lack of
client-side caching and the inability to stream over non-SMB connection types, will become magnified in the light of this
newly competitive landscape.
|
 |
About our Reviews and Scoring Methodology
|
|