Parallels could hold the key to user-installed applications

I think the vendor needs to chime in with the answer about client OS support.

That said I had issues with the VC RC for X64 Svr 08 and the desktop theme. It wouldnt stick...

Maybe I was missing something... but It was an RC i guess.

Gabe you wrote "Is it possible to make a version of Parallels Virtuozzo Containers that runs on Windows 7 that would enable users to install their own apps and have (manageable) control over one container, while leaving the other container fully managed by IT?" and it will give you only Svr08 desktop not Win7.

Just to note, even though isolated, I have experienced issues where a reboot of the host server is required to free up "isolated" containers.

AV is installed and managed only on the host, not the individual containers.

Rumour has it that AppSense are bringing something out that addresses this issue.  Unsure what it is exactly, but it is something like users can install applications in to a VDI image, but instead of installing it, it essentially packages it up in a "streamed" package and it is attached somehow to the user profile.  Then on each install the application comes back, so it is a user managed application.

Trying to find out more details on it though.

We (AppSense) have been working on this area for sometime now, and actually only announced the technology back at the BriForum event - see the video where one of our Product Managers, Chris Oldroyd demonstrated the early wares during the event - www.brianmadden.com/.../briforum-2009-demo-lab-appsense.aspx

As Gabe states, this is absolutely about seamless integration to ensure it just works - however this needs a form of management wrapped around it - ensure that the admin can get involved if required.

There will be more information around our approach available publicly soon, but in the mean time, please do take a quick look at the video.

Just use RingCube if that is what you want to do. They install most apps on a Desktop OS. A decent product with management and policy. No need to wait for Parallels to address this, who's approach is not as robust as RingCube.

That said this whole approach will fail outside of very simply implementations. Too hard to patch, keep up with MS, vendor risk etc.

To me, anybody who uses the term user installed apps is naive about how to mange a real IT environment.

Viewfinity, also do at install time encapuslation at the endpoint.

Hi, Parallels here.  

The simple answer to your question is yes, it is possible to make a version of Parallels Virtuozzo Containers that runs on Windows 7 that would enable users to install their own apps and have (manageable) control over one container, while leaving the other container fully managed by IT.

Essentially you provision two containers for each employee.  One container is locked down (restricted user rights) and with the other you grant admin rights or limited rights to the user, which effectively doubles your VDI implementation. This is where the Containers approach to VDI really shines as by going down the hypervisor route, which has much lower density, and therefore supports fewer desktops, it becomes a much more expensive proposition.

We will definitely support this feature in the next version of Parallels Virtuozzo Containers designed to support Windows server 2008 R2 and due out in the first half of next year. With this version, virtual desktops will be easily and seamlessly converted to Containers with even higher density then we have today.

I don't doubt Parallels can accomplish the task.  They are not always the fastest at supporting the latest OS versions, but their virtualization products have seen significant gains in features & perfomance over the last year to two.  

The sticking point is Microsoft Licensing.  Does Windows 7 allow a 'container' model of virtualization without requiring VECD?  I doubt it, and that recurring cost alone would be prohibitive.

Additionally, I may be naive, but under what circumstances does a corporation (small, medium or large) allow users to install applications at all, much less without prior approval.  I certainly don't allow it for our small company, but then we're regulated by HIPAA. Maybe Gabe or Brian could offer substantive evidence for needing such a feature in the first place.

@Jase: I totally forgot about this SafeSpace from AppSense. I tried it 2 years ago and I remember it was really slow. I hope they made it perform better. And then there's always the relatively high cost of AppSense products.

I think that all of this depends on what the actual requirement is for user-installed applications.  I would like to clarify how AppSense perceive this requirement and what type of solution we are bringing to market.  

This is the AppSense approach.  Check it out at  http://bit.ly/HyODd

So here are my thoughts, and I do not pretend to know everything, or how everybody operates. For the small percentage of users that do need to be able to install applications (and I do think overall this ia a very small percentage of users, perhaps less than 10%), why not just persistently assign them to virtual desktops like they currently are to a physical desktop?  I have however always suscribed to the IT should manage desktops in "most" environments, and think that IT providing access to an available library of virtualized applications with App-V (for example) is a great solution.

Anytime users are allowed to do "whatever they want", i.e. installing their own software, you require more IT staff to fix the problems they create, open yourself to liability for what they install (as companies are legally responsible for what is installed on corporate assets) and user profiles bloat.

I think that except for the small percentage of users that "require" a do whatever you want/need, users are better off with something that IT controls so they don't huirt themselves (and others).

Perhaps another approach would be to allow users to have software installations create a request that is forwarded to IT for authorization, and/or assistance?

My 2 cents.  The more options that are available the better, as no one solution is perfect for everyone.