![]() ![]() Perhaps these non-critical, non-store apps are prime candidates for automated updating. Should admins spend time readying those non-critical application binaries for maintenance and upgrades? Perhaps not. Basically, as a Workspace ONE admin, you’ve just inherited a new app for management (regardless of the testing/validation requirements). Is the app “business-critical,” thoroughly tested, and managed? Does the app simply require “maintenance” (e.g., upgrades)? In either case, Workspace ONE admins need to obtain each new app version and configure it for deployment within the Workspace ONE console. That said, each app that a user installs inevitably leads to a decision point. In many cases, IT simply manages the GateKeeper settings and allows the user to install non-store developer-signed and notarized apps. On the other hand, as an organization steward, IT needs to ensure apps are maintained and current. As an organization enabler, IT needs to ensure users can access the apps they need to be productive. In my experience, app management is always a delicate balance. But what if the folks using macOS in your organization have admin privileges to their system? How do you handle the upkeep on non-critical apps that users install out of convenience or familiarity? “Managed” Versus “Updated” Apps How much time do you spend packaging and deploying new versions of macOS apps? An updated version of Chrome? Check! The latest version of Zoom? Check! And on it continues across the twenty, or fifty, or more apps in your organization. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |