Skip to main content

VMware's ThinApp (formerly Thinstall) to go GA in a month!

VMware's ThinApp follows on the tails of Citrix and its own rival suite, XenApp.

What — what? XenApp versus ThinApp? Isn't that a just a terribly convenient way to draw attention to the products' similarities. Why a cynic might even go so far to say it's intentional.

But still, VMware's turnaround of ThinApp was relatively short. At least the company appears still somewhat light on its feet despite the swelling post-IPO.

The general availability release of ThinApp 4.0 will include new toys such as dynamic linking between self-contained applications and over-the-wire app updates via HTTP/HTTPs.

VMware's enterprise desktop boss Jerry Chen said that having each virtualized application isolated in a separate container is good for security and mobility — but it makes communication between two applications difficult.

For instance, take Microsoft Word and PowerPoint: two programs commonly used together. In order to cooperate previously, they would have needed to be contained in a single uber container. Application Link lets the apps make nice in the isolation of their individual bubbles.



Link
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Security: VMware Workstation 6 vulnerability

vulnerable software: VMware Workstation 6.0 for Windows, possible some other VMware products as well type of vulnerability: DoS, potential privilege escalation I found a vulnerability in VMware Workstation 6.0 which allows an unprivileged user in the host OS to crash the system and potentially run arbitrary code with kernel privileges. The issue is in the vmstor-60 driver, which is supposed to mount VMware images within the host OS. When sending the IOCTL code FsSetVoleInformation with subcode FsSetFileInformation with a large buffer and underreporting its size to at max 1024 bytes, it will underrun and potentially execute arbitrary code. Security focus
Post a Comment
Read more

OS Virtualization comparison: Parallels' Virtuozzo vs the rest

Virtuozzo's main differentiators versus hypervisors center on overhead, virtualization flexibility, administration and cost. Virtuozzo requires significantly less overhead than hypervisor solutions, generally in the range of 1% to 5% compared with 7% to 25% for most hypervisors, leaving more of the system available to run user workloads. Customers can also virtualize a wider range of applications using Virtuozzo, including transactional databases, which often suffer from performance problems when used with hypervisors. On the administration side, customers need to manage, maintain and secure just a single OS instance, while the hypervisor model requires customers to manage many OS instances. Of course, the hypervisor vendors have worked hard to automate much of this process, but it still requires more effort to manage and maintain multiple operating systems than a single instance. Finally, OS virtualization with Virtuozzo has a lower list price than the leading hypervisor for comme...
Post a Comment
Read more