I've neve will understand that: "install aplication"
Is it to fill computers of trash everywhere it can?
And now PB is add to that horrible cause
What's the meaning of "installing" packs?
-
Psychophanta
- Always Here
- Posts: 5153
- Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2003 9:33 pm
- Location: Anare
- Contact:
What's the meaning of "installing" packs?
Could someone explain why app paks have "installers". Is it not enough with just one or several executeable file/s?
I've neve will understand that: "install aplication"
Is it to fill computers of trash everywhere it can?
And now PB is add to that horrible cause
I've neve will understand that: "install aplication"
Is it to fill computers of trash everywhere it can?
And now PB is add to that horrible cause
I agree, nowadays everything i download from this forum, if it comes with an installer it goes straight in my bin! I just can't be arsed to open the 'Add or Remove Programs' panel to un-install something that could have been as simple as an *.exe in a zip file. C'mon guys we use PB! there is no need for fancy spamming installers! 
--Kale
vast majority of progrs /games actually dont need instalation config can be held in .prefs file in program dir etc
furthermore if you use it often installer-free progs gives you ability to easy
backup (just its folder) and move it to anothe computer or save your work if harddisk fails etc
conclusion -> most ppl make installer because 'everybody does' and not because its needed
furthermore if you use it often installer-free progs gives you ability to easy
backup (just its folder) and move it to anothe computer or save your work if harddisk fails etc
conclusion -> most ppl make installer because 'everybody does' and not because its needed
Christos
Re: What's the meaning of "installing" packs?
> Could someone explain why app paks have "installers"
In my experience, end-users (customers) are stupid. Simple as that. When
I use to have zip files of my apps, they couldn't unzip them properly (that is,
keep the original path structure intact). So I'd get e-mails saying that my app
doesn't work, and I'd find out later that Settings.ini wasn't where it was meant
to be, because they unzipped all files into one folder, with no subfolders being
created. It became easier just to have a small setup file instead.
Also, some web sites (such as Tucows, I think -- don't quote me on that) don't
accept zip files for submission... my apps were rejected as they were not in
Setup.exe format. (I think this is due to zip files not having a "standard" way to
uninstall the app). This, combined with "stupid user syndrome", made me decide
to just use setup files from now on. I think it's more of a comfort for users to see
the app listed in Add/Remove Programs too -- they like to know that they have
control of what's installed on their PC.
Don't forget that an installer lets you force the user to accept a license agreement
before they can use it... and the installer can also refuse to install the app on
systems that the app isn't compatible with. Lots of little things like that.
In summary, and in my experience, zip files are great for power users, but
not for end-users... and we need to cater for the lowest common denominator.
In my experience, end-users (customers) are stupid. Simple as that. When
I use to have zip files of my apps, they couldn't unzip them properly (that is,
keep the original path structure intact). So I'd get e-mails saying that my app
doesn't work, and I'd find out later that Settings.ini wasn't where it was meant
to be, because they unzipped all files into one folder, with no subfolders being
created. It became easier just to have a small setup file instead.
Also, some web sites (such as Tucows, I think -- don't quote me on that) don't
accept zip files for submission... my apps were rejected as they were not in
Setup.exe format. (I think this is due to zip files not having a "standard" way to
uninstall the app). This, combined with "stupid user syndrome", made me decide
to just use setup files from now on. I think it's more of a comfort for users to see
the app listed in Add/Remove Programs too -- they like to know that they have
control of what's installed on their PC.
Don't forget that an installer lets you force the user to accept a license agreement
before they can use it... and the installer can also refuse to install the app on
systems that the app isn't compatible with. Lots of little things like that.
In summary, and in my experience, zip files are great for power users, but
not for end-users... and we need to cater for the lowest common denominator.
I compile using 5.31 (x86) on Win 7 Ultimate (64-bit).
"PureBasic won't be object oriented, period" - Fred.
"PureBasic won't be object oriented, period" - Fred.
-
tinman
- PureBasic Expert
- Posts: 1102
- Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2003 4:56 pm
- Location: Level 5 of Robot Hell
- Contact:
Re: What's the meaning of "installing" packs?
Surely you mean "they like to think they know...." ;)PB wrote:the app listed in Add/Remove Programs too -- they like to know that they have control of what's installed on their PC.
My main gripe with install packages is that a lot of them always assume (or force) some default installation settings, such as:
"C:\Program Files\AppName" as in the install location
Root entry in the start menu
Desktop icon
The list goes on. And then the application doesn't uninstall properly later on because I've put things where I want. I don't mind install programs, they make far more sense if you have a bunch of DLLs that it needs etc, but please make sure everyone uses a decent one :)
If you paint your butt blue and glue the hole shut you just themed your ass but lost the functionality.
(WinXPhSP3 PB5.20b14)
(WinXPhSP3 PB5.20b14)
-
Psychophanta
- Always Here
- Posts: 5153
- Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2003 9:33 pm
- Location: Anare
- Contact:
That's right, PB.
But the ".zip or .exe" matter and your first paragraph is void, because you can always create an auto-decrunch .exe file to put it on tucows or to allow endusers to put it where ever they want in their computers.
It is curious, but I've noticed long time ago that bests programs haven't installers!!
Is PB between bests?
But the ".zip or .exe" matter and your first paragraph is void, because you can always create an auto-decrunch .exe file to put it on tucows or to allow endusers to put it where ever they want in their computers.
It is curious, but I've noticed long time ago that bests programs haven't installers!!
Is PB between bests?
I have never noticed that! Mind you, I have never wanted to un-install PB! -
Psychophanta
- Always Here
- Posts: 5153
- Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2003 9:33 pm
- Location: Anare
- Contact:
The purpose of installers is to have a standard way to install an application. Just look around, even FireBird and Thunderbird now have an installer (they had only a .zip before). That's because you aren't lost when dealing with the installer and you know what you're doing (or seems like, as adwares can be packed within 
). Another point is you have to accept the license before installing the program. On other side, I don't mind if the program has or not an installer, but it's probably not the case for everyone.
). Another point is you have to accept the license before installing the program. On other side, I don't mind if the program has or not an installer, but it's probably not the case for everyone.
-
Psychophanta
- Always Here
- Posts: 5153
- Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2003 9:33 pm
- Location: Anare
- Contact: