Poor business practices, and poor design should not be a point when thinking about what technology to use to deploy something.
Originally Posted by matt40k
Irrelevant I'm afraid!
SOLUS3 supports whatever package you throw at it, so they could deploy MSI - oh wait, they do.
Why do you need a specialised piece of software to do that? Windows Installer already logs every package that is installed in the event logs on each machine. Creating a tool to connect to a bunch of machines to extract relevant event logs is trivial work, and Capita could easily have created such a tool like that.
The thing about AD deploying MSI is you have no easy report of the status of the package, SOLUS3 will give a report of which machines have download the package prior to the installation, which machines have deploy it, I can get log from the central console of the installation, so when I deploy it for friday PM, I know that Monday PM I have to visit X because of Y problem (ie no free disc space). I've seen packages that give you this sort of control over AD deployments, but I've yet to find anything for free. I don't fancy wasting my time re-packaging software.
Transformation is simply customising your installation. So, instead of using a wizard, you're choosing individual settings. There are many manufacturers who have created their own custom mst generators - SMART, ABTutor, Office customisation wizard etc... You don't have to dive into Orca to do it. You're confusing technology with implementation.
Yes it's possible to have multiple MSI installation, but not with out transformation - again, I don't fancy doing this. You have multiple installations of SIMS Apps on central hosting. They're are other occations that you might want this - ie if you have two versions of SIMS running.
Running 2 versions is irrelevant if the MSI is built correctly.
I don't see why it is 'sticky' at all! It is just a technology. Just like InstallShield or whatever custom tool is used at the moment. I have at no point said you'd have to have a single MSI for everything. Why not have 1 which is for server side stuff, and 1 for clients. Every other client server piece of software I've ever come across does it like that.
I didn't say MSI can't do database, it's just sticky. Would you have to have two separate steps, one for database then the other workstations - just can't see how it would chain together for AD deployment. Personally, more work.
Your opinion, but it isn't 'way better than AD deployment'. Do you have to support 200 different pieces of software, all with their own stupid installers, their own stupid consoles and different demands on clients? From what I remember, you are pretty much SIMS based? So, unless you have similar requirements of your time, it is going to be very difficult for you to see our point.
Personally I don't get it. It's a free tool. It's waay better then AD deployment. It's supported.