Summary
Provide alternative, stable identifiers for Intune-synced Win32 applications in Nerdio to avoid dependency on Intune App GUIDs, which change during Patch My PC application updates.
Background
Our Azure Virtual Desktop session hosts are Entra ID joined and managed by Microsoft Intune. We use Nerdio’s Unified Catalog to sync Intune Win32 applications and assign them via Deployment Policies.
We also use Patch My PC to manage ongoing updates for Win32 applications. As part of its update workflow, Patch My PC removes the existing application and uploads a new package, which results in a new Intune App GUID.
Problem
When a Win32 application is updated by Patch My PC:
- The Intune App GUID changes
- Nerdio continues referencing the previous GUID
- The application in Deployment Policies becomes stale and shows:
“Intune App {GUID} was not found” - Manual intervention is required to remove and re-add the application to restore functionality
This creates unnecessary operational overhead and makes Nerdio deployment policies brittle in environments with automated application updates.
Feature Request
Introduce one or more non-GUID based identification options for Intune-synced Win32 applications, allowing Patch My PC to continue updating applications without breaking Nerdio associations.
Examples of acceptable alternatives could include:
- Application Display Name (optionally combined with Publisher)
- A logical application ID or alias maintained by Nerdio
- Detection rule–based identification (where detection logic remains consistent across updates)
- A “latest version” or rolling reference to the current Intune app representing the same logical application
The key requirement is that Nerdio can continue to track the same logical application across Intune app version changes without requiring manual reassignment.
Outcome Sought
- Patch My PC can update Win32 applications without causing Nerdio deployment errors
- Deployment Policies remain valid across application version updates
- Reduced manual maintenance and lower risk of missed or broken deployments
Comments (2 comments)