In this post I talk mainly about existing Windows applications and not the new Metro applications which will be introduced in Windows 8. Metro apps are a new type of application which are mainly for touch devices and are not meant to replace Desktop apps.
If you are somewhat experienced in using a mouse and keyboard then chances are that you have helped other people to install software on Windows before. Downloading applications, installing them and making sure that you don’t get any viruses, malware or browser toolbars in the process seems to be quite a challenge for a lot of Windows users and I am not at all surprised about this.
I think, as developers, we are so used to these familiar actions that we forget how difficult and daunting they are for the average user.
Finding Software
The first challenge is finding software. I am a naturally curious person and as such I have tried thousands of applications over the years, hence, when someone needs advise for a CD recoding software or a photo library application I point them to CD Burner XP and Google Picasa as in my experience they are the most usable and useful. Without personal recommendations from someone you trust or the experience of having tried a number of these applications, users normally just Google what they are looking for and are confronted with a huge number of different websites and applications. Some of them are great. Some of them are not so great and some of them are harmful. Scams, viruses and malware is often unfortunately just a few clicks away.
Downloading Software
Even when users settle on an application to try out it is often difficult to navigate the thousand different websites to download the application. A lot of websites also have advertisements that look like they are the download links to trick people to click on them.
A great example of this unfortunate practice is the website of the quite popular and useful Paint.NET application.
(red boxes are not the download but are advertisements – the download is marked by a green box – even when you click on the real download link you still have to navigate two more screens which are all riddled with advertisements)
At NovaMind we try to make it as simple as possible to download our application. A single click on the prominently placed Download Now button will start the download and moving your mouse over the button gives you detailed information on how big the download is, what system requirements the application has and also allows you to quickly switch between Mac/Windows versions.
Unfortunately a lot of other websites are not that easy to use. Case in point, our competitor has this:
I especially like how they require your email (even if you don’t want their newsletter) and phone number. Also, ‘Continue’ suggest that there is more pain to come before you are finally allowed to try their product.
Installing
Even if a user manages to find the application that they think they need and find the download link and manage to find the downloaded file on their computer there is still one last step. Installing the application.
This should be easy, right? They basically just need to confirm that they indeed want to install the application. On Mac OS, if you decide not to use the App Store, installing downloaded software is dead simple.
Double-click on the downloaded (.dmg) file and then drag the application icon from the left on to the Applications folder on the right.
Wait a bit…
Voila! Done!
To be fair, there are more complex scenarios but even these look like a walk in the park compared to things I have had to endure on Windows.
On Windows the situation is very different. 
I will spare you the dozens of screen shots to illustrate the horrible user interface and user experience. I am sure that you aware of the click ‘Yes’ –> click ‘Next’ –> click ‘Next’ –> ….. click ‘Next’ –> ‘Finish’ approach of Windows installers.
A lot of applications also have dependencies on other frameworks that need to be installed and some of these frameworks have dependencies on other things as well. Often the user is confronted with more than one installer (each of them with the potential to fail or to cause reboots).
Technical issues
I am working for NovaMind and over the years we have tried many different ways to make the installing of NovaMind for Windows easier.
Unfortunately installation technologies on Windows are riddled with problems. As a user you can see the symptoms with failing installations, non-localized text, pixelated pictures, pixelated application icons and applications that can’t update or uninstall properly.
As a developer you can easily see that the installation technologies on Windows are plagued with issues. Just search on stackoverflow for Windows Installer, Msi, WiX or even commercial solutions and you easily find hundreds of questions, a lot of them pointing out flaws or issues with the technologies. You can read about my own experience with this mess by checking out my answer to the question Can anyone provide a good “idiot’s guide” to creating an installer in VS2008 (C#) Pro?. Unfortunately, I am not the only one experiencing this. Windows software developers around the world waste days of their lives fighting with these kind of things instead of creating and improving great applications.
Updating
On the Mac there is a widely used framework for live-updating installed applications called Sparkle. On Windows, almost every application has their own updating system and it is no wonder since there is no live update framework that just works.
Casualties
I think that Windows would be a much more attractive platform if finding, trusting, installing and updating software wouldn’t be quite as difficult. Microsoft has done major damage to the Windows ecosystem by not providing such a system. In my opinion it is no wonder that a lot of innovative new applications are either on the web, on Mac OS or on phones.
A solution
The solution is not yet another installation framework or third party installation application that is patched on to the platform. The solution must be baked into the platform itself and completely hide away all technical aspects from the user. There should simply be no setup of applications – at least not from the point of a user.
One click and a progress bar is all there should ever be for installing, updating and removing of an application.
What we need is a central, easy to use, attractive and trustworthy place to find, purchase and install high quality applications. In short, we need an App Store.
Windows 8
For the longest time I strongly believed that Microsoft will come out with a Windows App Store that would finally do away with all this and solve one of the biggest pains on Windows. Microsoft would invent a new way of packaging up your application that would be simple and would support almost every type of application, be it native, .NET Framework or something else. The new App Store would finally give users a central place to find useful software which is free of crapware or malware and Microsoft would finally be able to highlight some of the great applications that exist for Windows and revitalize Windows Software development on the client. Purchasing applications would become more commonplace and the quality of applications would increase. Software developers would be able to earn money with their applications without having to trick people to click on false download links and without installing browser toolbars and Microsoft would earn a lot of money in the process. Everything would be better.
When Apple delivered their excellent App Store on Mac OS I had no doubt that Microsoft would follow suit very soon. Now, finally, Microsoft has unveiled the new App Store in Windows 8 and unfortunately it will not solve any of these issues.
I have explained why I think this in my post Why the Windows 8 App Store will fail
This is bad news for users and worse news for software developers. Users will continue to struggle with downloading and installing software and will instead use web services or switch to Mac OS and software developers will not have the opportunity to sell great applications to a large market and will continue to waste valuable time just to have a working installer.
It seems that if you want to create a Desktop app and have it in front of millions you should start developing for Mac OS instead of Windows as they already have this App Store thingy figured out and have it successfully on the market today.
Pingback: Noticias 01-Octubre-2011 - La Web de Programación
“Click next to install the latest .NET Framework”
I code .NET for a living, and as such always have the latest… But anyways… *Next*
“Click next to install DirectX 9″
I downloaded and installed the latest DirectX 9 redistributable 4 hours ago from the official website, but anyways…. *Next*
“Click next to install the latest version of Windows Installer”
… I would have thought Windows Update would have taken care of this, but anyways…. *Next*
“Click next to install these 3 toolbars! Required for installation!”
… Ok, that does it! *Quits Installation*
haha! I like the toolbar part.
sadly, true :/
LOL, App Store, you ppl are funny!!!! Maybe you should fund this useless idea.
To be fair, I think one should consider that there is a lot of people out there that has Microsoft as a target. Microsoft is not an innovative company at all. They were kicked out of the smartphone OS arena by their own mistakes, and so far are totally out of tablet’s business, coming with this Windows 8 that will only actually arrive, maybe, one year from now. Let alone their lethargic response to Mac OS years ago, when they could be so arrogant by owning the PC world. But still, a lot of people have jobs in this business because Microsoft puts technology accessible to massive number of users, both in business and consumer markets. By myself, I can’t stand Google arrogance, either. Developing for Android is messy. I see Windows 8 as an opportunity to bring a new player on this battle field, for the benefit of developers and users. Apple and Google are not better than MS at all, and they don’t use their power any better. I prefer the three very well alive, and the balance of power between them can bring us more advantage, including better technology.
I agree with you, i’m not a fan boy, but i do like to see MS build up a godd os to fight back android and ios, in a way that all 3 balance themselves and push tecnhology a step foward, it will only benefict consumers, It was apple and google sucess that driven Microsoft away from messy UX’s and crappy products, they were living in the shadow of windows sucess for many years, and now they must move on and inovate or be extinct, i have a Windows Phone 7, and i must say i like it even more than my android, cannot speak for tablets as i do not own one, but i hope MS raises the bar, then google or apple comes back to fight it with more good stuff and so on and so on….
I think you have missed a small stumbling point with this idea. As I’m almost certain that any attempt by Microsoft to create an all-encompassing “app store” would quickly be meet with monopoly/anti-competitive action from the millions of sites on the web that currently provide this functionality.
While i agree that software acquisition/installation can be a nightmare, in most cases these nightmares are perpetuated by the developers choices, not by Microsoft themselves, as the multiple “next” situation is often caused by multiple EULA, toolbars and the like, which of course Microsoft didn’t force anyone to do.
A developer can create a setup with only a single screen with progress bar just like in Mac IF the developer wants. I think Microsoft is not to be blamed. Its the greedy developers. You should really do some research before blazing off next time.
It’s 2011, why is this still an issue?
In 1999, Debian introduced ‘apt-get’ into Debian 2.1. For those unfamiliar with the packaging system most Linux distributions use, the vast majority of software that users will ever need on a Linux system are stored in a central repository (in this example, organized by Debian). From here, users can download new ‘packages’ and get updates for packages already existing on their system. So no more random web browsing to find graphics programs, or music players. Just check the repository.
Frankly it’s a solved problem.
Linux ‘apt-get’ is nice but it doesn’t solve anything since the marketshare of Linux desktops (servers is another story) is so small. And to me, “free” software just has too much of a socialist feel behind it. I like to pay for my goods because I charge for the software I labor to create. The Linux people say software is just “math” and can’t be “sold”. That is such a lame mantra to live by, there is as much work in programming and design and maintenance that it’s nothing like “math”. If the Linux crowd were true to their word, they’d be demanding that all products be reduced by the part of the price that covers the engineering of the product, that is just as much only “math”. But they don’t. They mostly hate capitalism, that thing that has driven innovation like no other country in the world. Linux folks want to see you install their “free” software they claim is open but the truth is 99.9% of users could not care less and could never use the source code period. It’s worthless to 99.9% and then they make their money by charging outrageous service fees for sites installing Linux or the few models that Dell and formerly HP used to sell with Linux have a huge price tag for support and people will have to get it because they’ll be lost otherwise. Most linux purchases are just people not realizing the machine doesn’t come with Windows.
It’s funny how they claim software is just math and the code should be free and open, but they want to charge you for their knowledge of that “math”. That is hilarious and a total contradiction to all they claim to stand for.
Apple devices are easy to install software, but you get not choice. It’s Job’s way or the highway. Ever try to download a FREE MP3 using an itouch or ipad? hmmmm? Suddenly you get vague error and it can’t perform the operation. Well how about that.
Capitalism made our country strong and even though there are slimeballs on the web, it’s no different than car salesmen or actual brick and mortar businesses or mail order. It’s always been buyer beware, but you have FULL CHOICE. YOu don’t have someone dictating to you which software you can and cannot use.
Users of today are far more intelligent about using Windows than this writer believes. Thanks for backing your fellow Americans there bud. I’m sure you are superior but in the meantime most people I know are creating networks at their homes and they are not IT people at all. Windows Home Server does make that easy but they need to be savvy enough to work through things and most people are today. It is 2011.
At my shop we shun Apple, the evil company who wants to control you and what software you use. Quicktime and itunes are such resource hogs and so poorly written they are nothing better than Apple approved trojans anyway, so how is that better?
Besides, where are all the Windows viruses and malware today? Are you living in the past. Windows 7 is far more hardened than XP and it’s acutally more secure than Leopard, it’s just something people don’t realize. Win7 has a layered defense model and was built using SDL. Apple puts no security into OS X. It is security by obscurity because if you notice, Apple releases several MEGA or MONSTER patches per year and they have hundreds of fixes, may of which are security fixes. And of those, a large number are fixing holes that allow remote code execution. Apple apologists are all over that and say “show me where OS X has been compromised (well if you pay attention OS X is the first OS to get hacked in major security contests each year) but the thing is, vulnerable code with proof of concept code means it was open to attack. The fact nobody in the criminal/terrorist world bothered does not remove the fact it was totally vulnerable. Again there are many security fixes for OS X coming in groups of hundreds in the MEGA patches Apple puts out.
Windows 7 users that I know are very happy and w/o malware.
Running IE in protected mode alone makes Windows vastly more secure, but it’s got many other layers of defense. It’s probably as secure as most Linux variants, if not moreso.
Google has screwed that up anyway and Android is a mess. There is so much fragmentation between the handset makers devs are running the other way. The Motorola handset purschase may help but they could alienate all other handset makers by making motorola devices more closed like an iphone.
1) With out microsoft there would be no tablets, no smart phonesm and no Apple.
2) There is more than enough software out there , for free, that runs on Windows for just about every task you can think of. Try searching on something like download.com.
3) You cannot blame Windows for badly designed websites, let be fair, this one might wor,k but its not very interesting is it?
4) The installation process from Marketplace, for Windows Phone 7 and Metro application is much different from the usual Windows installation. I suggest that you do some research before shooting you mouth of on a blog and publishing on an industry wide newsletter.
I agree that Microsoft have dragged there feet on both phone and tablet platforms. Windows 8 is set to change that. The issue is that people will buy the inferior Apple products, simply because that is the fashion (remember what happened to betamax, etc).
Do you work for microsoft?
Do you work for Apple?
Does anyone work for Google here ^^
I agree with everything you wrote. Unfortunately, Apple owns both operating system and hardware; both of which are carefully controlled and user friendly whereas Microsoft does not. As much as I have against Windows, I have come to expect little of what you suggest mainly because Microsoft simply doesn’t have and/or doesn’t seek to exercise the same degree of control over key parts of their user experience as Apple. Windows 7 is a much improved product but there is always room for improvement. I use Windows and put up with it’s arguably awful behaviors but I’ve seen worse!
I agree with you on some level. Although the installation techniques are fairly outdated in Windows, I think it’s the way software vendors let advertisement companies onto their websites, creating the awfull mess that is Paint.Net’s website for instance. Google (the search engine) even encourages this, by letting promoted ads in front of the actual search results.
As for MS: I think that they indeed should follow through on the whole Marketplace idea, as the Marketplace for Zune (which holds various content like Xbox Live, Windows Phone 7, Music and films) works perfect. I think it’s just a matter of time before we can welcome legacy Windows software in the Marketplace. There will be an update in Windows 8 Service Pack 23 or something
.
What is missing in here is the way MS protects its investments by relying heavily on the underlying registry. It’s just the way this business model works.
If I remind it correctly, the first reports I read about .Net was that it didn’t need any registry anymore. Just copy it in a directory of choice, if needed adjust an app.config in the same directory and run it.
But if it is that simple to install an application, it is probably also simple to make a working copy or 2,3,4….
“Double-click on the downloaded (.dmg) file and then drag the application icon from the left on to the Applications folder on the right.” … as a Windows user who owns a Mac and (very) occasionally has to try and install stuff on it, I find Mac installations a nightmare. WTF is a “DMG” file, where’s my Application folder and why should I have to drag anything? (and what if I just want to keep my hands on the keyboard??)
If that’s really the best the Mac can offer, then Windows is clearly way ahead. MOST times, (not all) when I want to install Windows software, I click the link on the website. Windows asks me if I want to run the installer or save it for later; if I click “run” then the software installs. If there are options available to me, the installer asks me for my preference, rather than make assumptions or lumber me with an inappropriate configuration.
If icons are pixellated or text not localised, that’s hardly the platform’s fault, it’s the developer’s. The fact is that the Windows market is massively bigger than the Apple market; the platform is easier to build for and has a greater range of tools, so many more developers build for Windows. That means more unprofessional, untested apps out there for Windows, so of course sometimes the experience will be poor. There’s also a vastly greater range of hardware and software combinations for developers to support. As a consumer, you have a choice. Own a Mac, run the hardware they say you must run, install apps configured with little or no user customisation, learn the Mac’s way of doing things, (and still end up with buggy applications) OR own a PC, customise it to your needs, choose from a massive array of software, and (often times) start installation with a couple of clicks, then tailor to your needs. I know which I prefer, your preference may be different. There’s room for both.
One could say WTF is an .exe file? WTF is an .msi file? Why is it any easier to know what these are than a .dmg file? It is just what you are used to and you simply show your bias. Anyway if you really can’t be bothered knowing what .dmg is then use Safari (with the defaults) and you won’t have to know, Safari will open it for you.
And you never use a mouse in Windows? You only have a keyboard? The solely Windows users I know, tend to rely more heavily on the mouse than Mac users I know (who typically also use Windows at some point).
Windows, for those interested, offers complete keyboard control. Most power users prefer it as they can get more done, more quickly. Just Google “Windows Keyboard shortcuts” and you’ll find more documents than you’ll ever need to keep handy until you learn to use the keyboard only. I’m sure the Mac is also the same way, I really don’t know.
But your hackneyed, junior high debating technique has not gone unnoticed. Your ad hominem attack based on one small piece of the other poster’s entry, aimed at bringing his objectivity and intelligence into question, is without question disingenuous.
He made some great points, all of which are arguable, but nevertheless, solid points on the differences between the volume of software available, and they level of configuration available for that software, between OS X and Windows. I happen to agree with him and his reasoning is the main reason I’m also a Windows user.
I like the freedom to install what I want and make the decision on the software’s validity, and especially have the ability to configure the software to my liking instead of what Apple has decided is best for you. Apple has never been famous for software, but their hardware. Even today, Quicktime and iTunes remain 2 of the biggest security risks one can install on their OS.
But one thing that I find amusing is the sheer volume of security fixes that Apple puts out yearly for all current versions of OS X, and has been something they’ve done all along. The ABM crowd and the media to a large degree has made security problems and fixes synomynous with Windows. And while it’s true that Windows has been the main target of hackers, both terroist and criminal minded, it obscures the fact that OS X has historically been far less secure.
Since 2007 Apple has put out so many MEGA and MONSTER patches and I invite you to peruse these downloads for the number of security fixes to the OS. There was just another Massive security patch sent out the other day for OS X and all iOS versions.
The fact that an OS is open to remote takeover via a security hole is not erased because nobody took advantage of it. It existed and OS X has somewhere near a 20:1 ratio or security fixes over NT 6x versions. Pwn2Own has proven year after year OS X goes down easily.
People should know that 99% of all hacks today are based on social engineering. This is a Windows problem because of it’s sheer marketshare volume. I know the Apple faithful believe the “marketshare” idea is a “myth” but considering 99% of attacks originate from emails, and Apple is far less secure than Windows based on the hundreds of security patches every time a MEGA patch is released, usually several times per year, it’s obvious that terrorists and criminals are going to go for volume. If the technique for hacking involves fooling the user into doing something that will give the hacker’s code the necessary permissions to run and a hacker knows when they send out thousands of emails that 97% of them are going to be received by Windows users, why, oh why, would they ever bother writing code to attack OS X and get a handful of hits per mailing? It’s ridiculous that would ever be the case, given the hacking requirements today. Windows 7 has layered defenses with IE running in protected mode. It’s is very difficult, moreso than OS X, be directly hacked with social engineering, so it’s obvious in this age of fooling users to visit a rigged site, or download and run malicious code, those who perpetrate such deeds are going for volume.
Even with all of the past security issues with Windows, it’s funny that events of major consequences have rarely occurred and most have happened on *x systems, which OS X is based on. The super secret military plane in the works for 20 years and many other unfortunate occurances of highly classified information being stolen have occurred mainly on *ix systems.
There are plenty of apps for windows that handle these issues well. Someone could just as easily argue against the Mac install process with things like “.dmg? That sounds like damage. It must be a virus.” Or, “why do I have to drag it to applications? Isn’t it already an application? Why does one action (drag) sometimes mean install, sometimes mean rearrange and sometimes mean uninstall? That seems horribly inconsistent.”
I actually thought of ‘damage’ the first time I saw a .dmg file too and I found the installation very odd but only because I was used to Windows installers. In the end, the Mac provides a *consistent* installation experience that users have to learn once and then it is straight forward and easy. On Windows, there is no consistency. Every installer can be different (and often is). For developers or tech-savvy users that might not be an issue but for the majority of users it is.
Ninite.net is a great start. I use it for any new pc I build.
I think we need a consistent and officially supported deployment solution that is baked into the platform and not just tacked on. These third-party installers just create the same inconsistency issues and each suffer from different problems… InstallPad, Ninite, AllMyApps, AppUp, AppSnap. Add to that the dozens of different installation techniques that are used under the hood and it is all a horrible mess.
I will say that sometimes installing a program on Windows can sometimes be confusing. Why are they behind sometimes you ask? Because businesses don’t like change and implementing new procedures. They don’t like things to change to quickley because it costs them money and downtime. They also want something they can manage easy and control access. You can’t do any of that with a Mac. You can’t control access, monitor, and remotely install on a Mac in any type of nice interface that would save you a ton of time. So the fight becomes between businesses and consumers. Then the other part are the consumers who want everything for nothing. So that is where are these tricks come from. I have seen the same people who screw up Windows screw up a Mac because they are looking for some App that is free and better than the paid for apps. And as for installing on a Mac, you don’t always drop the the Applications folder. To make matters worse sometimes it uses the built in installer, other times not. An unlike Windows installer which tells you when a dependancy is missing, many programs for Mac simply fail with no explaination. I have spent hours trying to figure out why programs wouldn’t install only to discover that they weren’t for my version of Mac OS. Screensavers are an small example. No error, it just doesn’t work. The main problem with any OS is you can’t fix end users wanting things for free or businesses wanting to make money. It’s all a cat and mouse game in the end.
It’s true that paint.net does a spectacularly bad job at making itself available, but this is in no way microsofts fault. App stores and the like invariable have worse problems, such as draconian rules set by the owner of the appstore and insane shares (for non-free stuff that no one in their right mind would use anyway) going to the owner of the appstore.
You can also do it right. When google for firefox (or chrome, or µTorrent, or CCleaner or a million other programs) and go to the first link, there will be no doubt as to what you should do.
As far as installing goes, clicking “next” blindly almost always gets the job done.
All of this is so simple a child can do it. Proof? I did, and so did all my friends. It’s not fundamentally hard, old folk just aren’t used to it.
Microsoft is an open eco-system with vastly more users (both business and personal), more developers, more developer tools, more applications, more highly specialized niches, more hardware vendors, more VARS, more retail outlets and .. a lot more enemies. Most days I feel like one of those enemies despite making a living from developing in the MS world for 20 years. (btw I am looking forward to needing to develop for Apple devices as I see some of my market moving there)
Apple make great products: Microsoft have created an entire industry and, much to my amazement, don’t OR are not able to control it like Apple controls their environment.
What I have never understood is why microsoft and its main partners have not made better use of code signing. Surely somewhere in that technology was a better solution than UAC ( which could only have been designed by their lawyers or the biggest idiots in IT).
As IT seems to spend half its time trying to create metaphors in applications for physical world experiences .. lets say buying software is like buying parts or accessories for a car , buy dodgy aftermarket parts and get them installed by a back yard mechanic and .. you get my car … and you have broken your warranty and know you are on your own if it all goes horribly wrong.
Somewhere between the a-retentiveness of Apple and the laize-affaire attitude of microsoft surely there is a middle way that would be better for most of us.
and then of course we could always use some more thinking from developers, websites, hard ware vendors and better tools for punishing the annoying, stupid and greedy.
agreed
>It seems that if you want to create a Desktop app and have it in front of millions you >should start developing for Mac OS instead of Windows as they already have this >App Store thingy figured out and have it successfully on the market today.
Oh that’s brilliant. If I’m a developer, I should create my app for Mac so that I can target the 10 percent (probably being generous) of US computer users who have it, instead of the 90 percent who run windows?
Sure, Windows has greater market share but how are you going to get your app in front of Windows users? On the Mac you can get your app in front of a majority of Mac users via the AppStore. On Windows you can’t. As a developer the *accessible market* share is far greater on the Mac than on Windows and the effects are already visible.
You’re talking about two entirely different ecosystems designed for two entirely different groups of people. Mac is tailored to meet the needs of the computer illiterate. There is a lot of depth there as well as powerful programs, but at its heart, and even in the company’s advertisements, the theme of not needing to know anything to get started is ever present. Why on Earth would MS want to dumb down their product in order to compete with a company that.isn’t their competition? Win8 is about trying to get their foot into media they do not dominate. They’re not worried about the lowest common denominator on the pc side because most people can’t afford the easy route of buying a mac. They have to learn. Considering how little of a market share mac has on the desktop along with how many literate professionals use them tells me very few average Americans are willing to pay for such a dumbed down experience and our nation’s computer literacy is better off because of it.
You’re missing the point. Windows can support simple installations, no problem. One-click installation is a well-known feature. The stuff you are complaining about has nothing to do with Windows, it’s a problem caused by software vendors. Your example shows a web site – how is a web site layout a “Windows problem” ???
Don’t think clicking “NEXT” while installing stuff is so hard!!
anyways, more options and more vendors means cheaper stuff for lower end consumers who can’t afford higher prices.
A single vendor could mean higher prices.
That’s certainly not what we see on iOS/Mac – the sheer number of potential customers causes a price drop on applications and not an increase.
Um so wait you are complaining about software installation on Windows, when it has zero to do with windows. There is nothing about the installation process that has anything to do with Windows, the program developers put all of those next, now this next, steps in. There is nothing forcing them to do it. I have a bunch of software where you click .exe, wait and its done. That same software ticks me off cause I don’t want it to install in my c:\programs folder, I want it on my other drive that is backed up in my raid. Hmm so yeah being able to say where I want to install is nice.
Beyond that though it’s all about the person making the install kit. Not Windows or MS at all. So um learn something about computers before you complain. Want to grip then grip at ITUNES which requires about 4 nexts to install, and update, and it’s made by Apple that could have a single install and complete option but choose to make it harder.
For websites once again it’s about the site owner not microsoft.
of course the installation process has something to do with Windows. Whether you like it or not there is a defacto standard installation experience on any OS and Windows uses Windows Installer (MSI) which causes exactly the experience I described. Of course you can just ignore the standard and create your own installer but that is a bad idea. What we need is a fundamental change of the system and only MS can do that.
finally, if you think I like iTunes you have the wrong guy. worst piece of crap ever.
1. Your competitor and your comments require e-mail, so glass houses and all that.
2. Install Google Chrome – watch as ClickOnce installs by the user actually just clicking once.
3. Working with my BUILD Win dev machine – installs are multifaceted – there is a click once and a customize (which lets me choose install location and features)
1) true, I hadn’t changed the default wordpress settings. changed it now.
2) Google Chrome isn’t installed with ClickOnce – ClickOnce is used as a bootstrapper to install the installer. Can’t find the details on this but you couldn’t install an app like Chrome using ClickOnce alone and ClickOnce has as many issues as any of the other existing installation technologies. I am not sure how Google did it but I suspect it is neither easy, nor standard. I have certainly not seen any other apps installed that way.
3) which installations are you referring to?
Yes there is a company that does that. They sell (or give away for free) your software for you, they put it in their own repositories and push updates when needed.
Check it out https://developer.impulsedriven.com/#publishing
and there is Steam and AppUp and AllMyApps and ninite, and installpad and appsnap. All of them have different issues and have different reach. What I call for is a central solution that is baked into the platform.
I’ve tried many install systems: Windows/Mac/Linux. So far, the easiest I’ve found is the Mac App store (1-click downloads), followed by Ubuntu’s tick the box beside the application to install. Next, I like the “apt-get install [program name]” method of Ubuntu (and other Debian-based systems), as well as the Mac’s version “port install [program name]” (using Macport).
Problem is: not every Mac application is in the Mac App store, not every Linux program is available via Ubuntu’s 1-click install. Otherwise, I can get most stuff to work on Ubuntu using apt-get (with a few rare exceptions, such as proprietary NVidia drivers which are a real pain to install via the command line). With a Mac, I don’t have to worry this kind of problem as the drivers are pre-installed. Lots of programs are available via .dmg files as well. The real headache on a Mac comes when “sudo port install [programname]” fails (e.g. sudo port install opendx usually fails), and you start wondering whether a “compile from source” is worth the effort. On the other hand, Windows installs are slightly harder, but I rarely encounter very hard-to-install stuff (until the Windows registry is broken). Here’s my ranking in order of hardest to easiest:
Hardest:
1. Installing a Windows / Mac / Linux binary application (or via Macports/Fink on Mac, or Apt-get on Linux) when there’s a dependency problem (hardest).
2. Fixing the Windows Registry
3. Compile from Source (with dependencies) on Windows (in Cygwin)
4. Compile from Source (with dependencies) on Mac
5. Compile from Source (with dependencies) on Linux
6. Macports/Fink installs on Mac (when they work)
7. Apt-get installs on Ubuntu or Debian-based systems
8. One-click Installs in Ubuntu Add/Remove programs
9. One-click Installs in Mac App store (easiest).
By the way, for the first 3 of the hardest items I have never had any success in my experience before.
What is wrong with you and why your blog doesn’t solve a thing.
Why do you specifically state Windows 8 in the title of your post and then in the very first paragraph put a disclaimer that you are not talking about the new interface in Windows 8?! Are you serious???
Then you go on to complain about the design and useability of various websites like that has anything to do with the operating system?
I also have a Mac and I hate using it because I can almost never figure out how to do anything. It provides almost no contextual help to help a new user just getting started. Take your screenshot above of “dragging an .DMG file (whatever that is) into the application folder.” Why is that neccessary, and why should I have to drag anything. There is nothinig to tell me that, I am just supposed to somehow know that I guess. It seems to me clicking on an application to install it is way more intuitive then dragging stuff.
I think you should look at ChromeOS’s strengths in these areas. You still have the same security issues with OSX as you do with Windows from software that is not on the platforms store. Chrome will not have any of these issues by using Native Client.
Microsoft already has an app store.
Go look at Microsoft’s 2008 R2 investment in HA, VM and cloud. Windows 8 is a client OS, just one piece of the comprehensive suite. They are so deep in version Hell that even if they give it away to all the people they’ve screwed, it won’t make any difference. Linux beat them to it.
Since v 6.0 Visual Studio has had an excellent ‘single click’ deployment packager. If you can’t find it, maybe you aren’t cut out to be a programmer.
After 10 years destroying Microsoft, the British East India company finally removed the shackles. As long as Microsoft obeys their globalist masters, maybe they’ll do something noteworthy. But as their new masters are busy destroying North America, not there. Magic eight ball says India, or Columbia. Fortunate son Bill Gates calls this ‘the complexities’. I expected better.
At least Microsoft doesn’t produce firearms. All those BSODs would be a real problem.
Yes. The reason Apple software is easy to install is that you have no options at all. If it doesn’t work, that’s just the way it goes: there’s nothing you can do about it. Your hands are tied behind your back. Not that this matters, really, since Macs can’t do anything anyway: useless platform with software which amounts to little more than video games. But apart from that, yes… you’re right… whatever.
Of course the REAL solution is to switch to Linux – on Ubuntu you have thousands of no cost applications in default repository and, there are dozens of repositories for more experienced users. No advertising. No viruses. No malware. Automatic updates for new features and security. That comes with easy to use GUI tool for applications search and browsing.
On Fedora you have similar facilities, as well as on many other Linux distros.
That is what happens when developers CARE about USER experience and satisfaction, not about LUST for MONEY, having said that, Ubuntu’s business model provides enough financial incentive as well.
Pingback: Всем сотрудникам отдела! «
I think the crux here is that Microsoft caters to the developer, where as Apple caters to (and sometimes coddles) the user. Being that MS caters to the developer, they also highly value backward compatibility… hence their app-store behavior in Windows 8. But this is why there are tons more apps for Microsoft versus MacOS… there are simply more developers. I think the market has proven device users prefer Apple, and desktop users prefer Microsoft. It just depends on whether you want “just-works” simplicity, or tons of choice, flexibility, and potential confusion… and apparently people want different things for their desktop versus their portable devices.
PS Microsoft HAS an installation platform, but no store to support it… MSI. Frankly, I think it is confusing and hard to use, so you continue to have a menagerie of installation technologies out there now. I would definitely like to see Microsoft develop a new cohesive app installation technology, but good god, I hope they can do better than MSI. Maybe then, we could see the app store you are dreaming about.
MS doesn’t cater any more to developers than Apple. On the contrary MS seems to largely ignore issues that developers face. The whole Silverlight/WPF debacle is a good example of that.
I agree about MSI. terrible.
Huh! Better not try writing the Part 2 – spend a couple of years away from that Mac and work on Windows – let’s see if it’ll help you see the light at the end of the tunnel you are in…
Your point being?