Installing Apps Confusion?

[discoforce]

Wow... after a little over a year since switching.. I get it! Seriously, that was the most helpful comment I've ever read on here! Thanks

My pleasure

I'm just amazed anything useful has come out of this thread

 

[ScottB]

I'm guessing most people feel comfortable installing software different ways. My family just finds the apps they need in their Applications folder, and installing anything frightens the hell out of them. I like to test my software from a disk image, deleting preferences if I don't like; and drag it to where I want, whether that be to the network, my laptop or my desktop. I'm a control freak and I don't like installers unless they tell me where their putting things. The way developers can distribute software upgrades using dmg's is brilliant. You can just post a new disk image on your site for people to simply overide their older software with, and theirs no worry about creating an updater app. However, most dmg's come with a "Drag to Applications folder and Eject this Image" finder background, simply because lots of people don't get it and perhaps this process should be more streamlined.

 

[OldCorpse]

I'm guessing most people feel comfortable installing software different ways. My family just finds the apps they need in their Applications folder, and installing anything frightens the hell out of them. I like to test my software from a disk image, deleting preferences if I don't like; and drag it to where I want, whether that be to the network, my laptop or my desktop. I'm a control freak and I don't like installers unless they tell me where their putting things. The way developers can distribute software upgrades using dmg's is brilliant. You can just post a new disk image on your site for people to simply overide their older software with, and theirs no worry about creating an updater app. However, most dmg's come with a "Drag to Applications folder and Eject this Image" finder background, simply because lots of people don't get it and perhaps this process should be more streamlined.

Wow, breath of fresh air! Thank you for an intelligent discussion of the issue. I understand your position, and I believe one can accomodate both the "control freak" and the user who isn't interested in fiddling with the OS (as well as newbies). For example, in the scenario I outlined, this could happen:
1)click FBARdmg
2)Dialogue: "Do you want to install FBARapp?" click "YES" or click "NO"
3)Clicking "YES" brings up a password prompt
4)Enter password brings dialogue "Default Install" and "Custom Install" options for powerusers such as allowing you to browse where to install, which elements to install etc.
5)You choose your option and - DONE!

Important disclaimer: I am NOT claiming that this is the only way, or the best way. I'm sure there are other ways of designing the process. However, one thing is INDISPUTABLE - this is *SELF* explanatory - no matter your background (windows, unix, sky, foo), or your level of computer savvy, you cannot go wrong here, there is nothing puzzling and no possibility of misunderstanding. That emphatically is not the case with the current design. Is it possible to make the process such that it is BOTH easy AND powerfully flexible - absolutely, Apple does it all the time. They should do the same with this process (again, not necessarily my proposal, but something equally easy). And I'm sure eventually they will.

 

[Tel]

Wow, breath of fresh air! Thank you for an intelligent discussion of the issue. I understand your position, and I believe one can accomodate both the "control freak" and the user who isn't interested in fiddling with the OS (as well as newbies). For example, in the scenario I outlined, this could happen:
1)click FBARdmg
2)Dialogue: "Do you want to install FBARapp?" click "YES" or click "NO"
3)Clicking "YES" brings up a password prompt
4)Enter password brings dialogue "Default Install" and "Custom Install" options for powerusers such as allowing you to browse where to install, which elements to install etc.
5)You choose your option and - DONE!

Important disclaimer: I am NOT claiming that this is the only way, or the best way. I'm sure there are other ways of designing the process. However, one thing is INDISPUTABLE - this is *SELF* explanatory - no matter your background (windows, unix, sky, foo), or your level of computer savvy, you cannot go wrong here, there is nothing puzzling and no possibility of misunderstanding. That emphatically is not the case with the current design. Is it possible to make the process such that it is BOTH easy AND powerfully flexible - absolutely, Apple does it all the time. They should do the same with this process (again, not necessarily my proposal, but something equally easy). And I'm sure eventually they will.

Taking away functionality for simplicity is not something I see Apple doing anytime soon. Your idea of how it should work takes away a lot of the freedom that .dmg files bring. For example, I only have a 60GB internal hard drive, not a lot considering the size of my RAW files. The less-essential apps that I have would take up far too much room on my hard drive. But thanks to the current system, I can leave a .dmg on my external hard drive, mount it when I need it and just eject it after using it knowing that it isn't taking up unnecessary space on my internal hard drive.

I also find your definition of "intelligent discussion," quite amusing, it seems to me that you believe that everyone who agrees with you is intelligent and everyone who has a different opinion is wrong? Sounds quite ignorant to me.

Don't get me wrong, I think you're right in some aspects, the installation process clearly could be simpler. But while you're irritated by the fact that Comic Life isn't easier to install, there are an awful lot of people benefitting from the freedom that .dmg files give them and using this to increase their productivity for getting important work done.

 

[FFTT]

An easy install can have a downside too.

Especially when the developer adopts the mindset that
they know what's best for you.
Which usually means what's in it for them.

Of course we all know of one Redmond based company that always has the user's best interests at heart, Riiiiiight!

This is exactly why many users prefer a bit more control over what goes into
their computers.

In one recent case a developer posted an automatic updater, update that deleted the previous update program from the users hard drive without the users permission.

This was done to enable stronger digital rights management for the developer, but the licensed users regarded this tactic as abuse of privledges.

So be careful what you wish for.

 

[discoforce]

I think I finally figured out why this thread is confusing me. Please bear with me while I try to get this straight in my head

We have two groups of folks arguing for and against the following process for installing applications:
1) open disk image
2) drag application icon to applications folder
3) close disk image

Lumping the arguments into two groups we have:
1) "It's simple and it gives me control, so Apple should not change it. This is good for both newbies and power users alike."
VS.
2) "It's not simple, nor intuitive, so Apple should change it to a wizard-based system. This would be good for both newbies and power users alike."

<Disclaimer>If I have misrepresented or offended anyone in either camp, I welcome them to refine my observations but I think this is enough to get us started.</Disclaimer>

Now what struck me as odd was not the difference in opinion (everbody's got one, just like...), but that Apple was the object of much of this attacking and defending. And I was left thinking, but haven't I installed applications BOTH ways on my mac?

Because Apple is focus here, let's take it to them. From apple developer's website:

In Mac OS X, software such as applications, frameworks, and plug-ins is packaged in the form of bundles, which are directories in the file system that group related resources. It is often possible for users to simply drag such software to their hard disks from a CD, mounted disk image, or other location. For software with more complex installation requirements, developers can create installation packages and let users install them with installation tools. Executable bundles can support dynamic configuration through mechanisms such as property lists, user preferences, and environment variables.​

I added the emphasis (i.e., it wasn't in the original) to make the following point: What the installation experience is like to the user is up to the developer of the software, not the operating system. Apple itself developed the Installer program (/applications/utilities/installer):



Developers choose whether or not to use this program, and developers choose what instructions to include. It is a wizard-type program in that when you run the installation package (i.e., double click the icon, see OldCorpse's last post, step 1) you get a series of dialogue windows that walk you through the process.

If you want to just keep clicking "Okay/Continue" that application will be installed (easy method). If you want to find out more about what it's doing you can choose "File -> Show Files" to see what's in the installation package (or use Pacifist, which I just learned about ).

The short of it is this: Apple designed Installer to do exactly what folks have been arguing Apple should or should not do.

Many developers choose not to use the Installer program. To me this is similar to Windows when, instead of a simple "setup.exe" file, I get a zip file with instructions on where I'm supposed to extract files. When this happens I don't blame Microsoft, I blame the developer of the program.

Thanks for reading

 

[ScottB]

If you want to find out more about what it's doing you can choose "File -> Show Files" to see what's in the installation package

That's handy, I didn't realise you could do that.

 

[FFTT]

Also right (control ) click on the Application Icon and show contents.