EUCPodcast

agree what containers for windows though? You consider laying == container

sure layering is a type of containers, app-V, third party email clients

Yes but at one point protecting the data has to protect the device.

If I want to prevent people from reading an email app I must guarantee the device to lock all times. No way around that.

good point

@crod Build the lock policy into the mail app not the device?

it depends on what industry you are, different industries = different requirements. The CIO wants less security for him but more for everybody else #wrong approach

sure. How many apps are like that today?

Barry Coombs

@crod thats built into a number of data sharing apps already

@crod #good #worxmail #airwatch they all have email containers to protect the data without changing the device.

mobile OS's have been built with containers in mind, desktop OS not so much

Alexander Ervik

The whole issue is down to is the device private or not? Company issued = okay to controll - private = you have the choice! There are policies in place from country 2 country as well...

too much focus on extreme methods of protecting the data while ignoring the obvious and significantly easier

How about Spoon.net. They state they are the containers for Windows and they are Open Source, also but app containers at the moment seem to have a very specific use case

Protecting the data is not the same as what I am saying. Encrypting/sandboxing is not what I am complaining about and certain things I do not see a way around it.

how many of your customers use 2FA? none of this matters if the password is weak

Alexander Ervik

Spoon.net is super cool! Good call! Easy to use, doesn't promise more than it does!

Phillip Jones

@dbrinkmann Seeing it in certain verticals pretty often

@P2Vme you can't claim security and use AD username/password as single auth method. seeing it often too, much less than 50% though

stevegreenberg

Containers are the right architecture for simplicity and efficiency, good to see them emerging in workable form finally

Microsoft Rights Management has protected documents for years, how many people use that in their organization?

@dbrinkmann the problem with MRM is that you depend on the OS implementation, not all features are in all OS mobile or desktop.

most security is based on identity, its a consumer / enterprise issue we all deal with and one that i hope is addressed in my lifetime

good points dan

microsoft has published a SDK for mobile platforms, the problem is adoption, not the technology

I think that's been the problem for decades, Dan. Microsoft tend to publish developer guidelines well in advance of making significant OS changes. Devs can't adjust quick enough or maybe they don't want to

I'll contend that its still a user adoption issue. it impacts the user experience and a high percent of data isn't worth it, therefore it doesn't represent enough financial incentive for organization to force it and software comp to develop to it

One would expect that to change with so many companies paying 15 million+ for extended support on XP and the constant catch up with IE. Not forcing it is a costly endeavor, probably more so

obviously most companies believe that isn't true. Cash, Rules, Everything, Around, Me... C.R.E.A.M.
Get the money
Dollar, dollar bill y'all

Dane Young, MBA11

.@gilwood_cs just said PVS easier than MCS and no one argued. What?!?

Maxime Breda

pvs is more clear to use, no things under the hood like mcs

PVS is smart. MCS is dumb. For dumb people.

I agree with @gilwood_cs, once you understand the big picture PVS is a lot simpler to manage and maintain.

If you use MCS or PVS and deploy apps with App-V. Check out Bram Wolfs great App-V Scheduler tool. No large App-V Server setup required

Alexander Ervik

Agree with @crod MCS is the easy way out of mngmt of images, whereas PVS is more complex, but for a good reason!

Phillip Jones

@ervik @crod I don't see PVS as that much more complex personally...

PVS is more complex just because it needs a couple more servers and a file share?

PVS is very simple. People make it complicated.

@crod I agree, easier to explain linked clone updates

Maxime Breda

Pvs permit a better control on image lifecycle

Phillip Jones10

VMware has a better track record with acquisitions and incorporating them than Citrix so far

-- who's killed off more? #negativeNanny

Not sure about that. Remember when they acquired the digital persona thing from RTO?

John Furrier

the Federation (EMC) knows how to buy and integrate

I was RTO customer at one time

ThinApp is another example. Never properly integrated.

thought it was odd App Volumes see shows as cloud volumes on the install,backwards compatibility i guess

Andrew Wood

if you're in the UK, come see the UK Citrix User Group 2nd April in Newcastle and hear about AppVolumes as one of a number of great app delivery technologies

HP are the kinds of killing off Products. How about Dells vWorkspace, I haven't used it yet but the chatter around it makes it sound like the next coming of my boi, Jesus!

Phillip Jones

@Rorymon HP is where products go to die... haven't used vWorkspace yet either

Maxime Breda6

Os management is a point, pain behind is manage all différent way to intégrate apps in os. Appv, thin app, local install, layering, app volume. Lot of techs to select

Do you have a preference, yourself?

Maxime Breda

Yes for sure ;) for non persistent, pvs + appv. But interested by layering. For persistent, layering seems the solution.