If you want reporting to look more appealing to the managers, then only
deploy to machines where the requirements will be met. ;)

On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 4:41 PM John Aubrey <[email protected]>
wrote:

>  I would do the same, filtering with collections.  I think it is in
> general easier (at least for me).  I haven’t ventured into the dependences
> yet.
>
>
>
> *From:* [email protected] [mailto:
> [email protected]] *On Behalf Of *ccollins9
> *Sent:* Monday, April 13, 2015 3:26 PM
> *To:* mssms
> *Subject:* Re: [mssms] Application dependencies
>
>
>
> I agree, dependency would be the wrong move here.  Either a targeted
> collection, or a custom requirement.  If it were me, I'd probably create a
> collection because then I could quickly see how many computers had O2013
> installed, which might be helpful at a later date and you don't need to go
> run a report.
>
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 11:48 AM, Gailfus, Nick <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
>
> https://gallery.technet.microsoft.com/office/How-to-Deploying-Office-0f954e7f
>
>
>
>
>     Nick Gailfus
> Computer Technician
> p. 602.953.2933  f. 602.953.0831
> [email protected] <[email protected]>| www.leonagroup.com
>
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 8:43 AM, Todd Hemsell <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>  how did you deploy office 2013?
>
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 10:35 AM, Steve Whitcher <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>  I've got an outlook plugin package to deploy to our workstations, but I
> only want it to go to computers that have Office 2013 installed.  If I set
> a dependency on the deployment type for the plugin, to be dependent on
> Office 2013, but uncheck the auto-install box for the dependency, will that
> give me the result I'm looking for, or will it end up creating a bunch of
> machines with errors for the deployment because they don't have the
> dependency?
>
>
>
> The alternative option would be to create a collection based on computers
> with office 2013 and only deploy to that collection, avoiding the
> dependency altogether.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>



Reply via email to