Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Can we talk about the rude installers not asking for installation locations?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 82 posts

Re: Can we talk about the rude installers not asking for installation locations?

#61

Post by IAmBroom »

alphazard wrote: post #22

I agree with the sentiment; I also want to control where things are installed. But the framing of the technical problem here is totally backwards. The operating system or application manager within the operating system (what does flatpak consider itself?) should decide where all application state goes. The application shouldn't ever prompt the user for this, it should just assume a path inside a sandbox. That path in…

Spoken like a Linux software developer, I suppose. As a Windows user of generic software (image editing, video players, games, etc.), I want to be able to control such crap. I have a media player that can easily fill a small HD with its mindlessly huge DB, for instance. Rather than manually cleaning periodically, or upgrading my $y$tem, it's easiest to say "Software, store your data here".

Re: Can we talk about the rude installers not asking for installation locations?

#62

Post by IAmBroom »

diffeomorphism wrote: post #17

Weird windows centric view. There shouldn't even be a question where to put things much less a "wherever you want". Instead you want a sane, sensible standard.

> Weird windows centric view.

What a surprise, an anti-Windows snob comment. "I dislike 75% of the world's OS choice, so let's pretend it doesn't exist."

Re: Can we talk about the rude installers not asking for installation locations?

#63

Post by IAmBroom »

zahlman wrote: post #43
ape4 wrote: post #4

As long as the uninstaller can find it

I don't want an uninstaller to be required by default.

I think that ship has sailed. As soon as software uses more than one custom path to store its crap, I can no longer be sure I've deleted everything.

Re: Can we talk about the rude installers not asking for installation locations?

#64

Post by IAmBroom »

gethly wrote: post #35

Always chose custom settings when installing anything. Not only you always get to pick target location but often you can avoid installing some additional garbage. I see no problem here though. Maybe i am too used to these things and some people just never learn and click on every button that is presented to them?

Maybe OP is complaining about times when there isn't such a button? In fact, explicitly OP is discussing those instances.

Re: Can we talk about the rude installers not asking for installation locations?

#65

Post by IAmBroom »

bee_rider wrote: post #29

It really depends on the system. In Linux for example it is pretty conventional to ask. But, the asking is often done by querying some environment variables. If a program prompts the user for a directory instead of querying the appropriate environment variable, that is a violation of the stated user preference.

Huh? How is "the appropriate environment variable" the "stated user preference"?

Re: Can we talk about the rude installers not asking for installation locations?

#66

Post by IAmBroom »

StableAlkyne wrote: post #49
RamRodification wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is very annoying It's a feature. You shouldn't be installing software on your work computer. Your IT department should be vetting it, deploying it, and keeping it up-to date for you. Maybe you can tell the difference between report.pdf and report.exe, but too many people can't, so unfortunately we can't let everyone install anything.

> Your IT department should be vetting it, deploying it, and keeping it up-to date for you. There are not enough IT staff at my organization to do this. They have an approved list of software that may be installed. Some common installations are automated, others are niche-enough that it's DIY. We don't live in a perfect world where the IT staffing ratio is 1:20 (or whatever arbitrary number you would consider "good")…

"We" are the large-enough companies to have full IT departments. (I hate this practice, but it is necessary.)

"Your" IT department should consider giving you your own admin account. But it's their call.

Re: Can we talk about the rude installers not asking for installation locations?

#67

Post by IAmBroom »

StableAlkyne wrote: post #55
loloquwowndueo wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There’s an argument to be made that this is by design/edict. The company does NOT want you installing random crap on their machines.

No, that's the default behavior in Windows. If you install to, say, app data it's fine. If you install to program files, you need admin because it is a protected folder. > The company does NOT want you installing random crap on their machines. Why do you immediately jump to the conclusion that the post is about installing "random crap?"

If it's not approved by IT in advance, by definition it is random, and quite possibly crap.

Re: Can we talk about the rude installers not asking for installation locations?

#68

Post by IAmBroom »

JohnFen wrote: post #58
crazygringo wrote: post #9

Can you be more specific about which platform you're talking about? On a Mac, I've never wanted an application to go anywhere but the default /Applications. I don't ever recall being asked if I want another location, nor would I want to be. Is it different on Windows or Linux? And why would you want a different install location?

> Is it different on Windows or Linux? And why would you want a different install location? On Linux, I want to be able to choose my install location because I may want it installed on removable media, or on a different drive for space reasons, or because I want to keep executables used for a single project with the rest of the files that comprise that project. The same things apply to Windows, but also on Windows (w…

Oh, are we opening this discussion up to how much we hate OneDrive?

Re: Can we talk about the rude installers not asking for installation locations?

#69

Post by IAmBroom »

munchlax wrote: post #52
timemct wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

'They' is also used when gender is unknown and has been for a long, long time. Person_1: I found this great blogger whose writing I think you'd love. Person_2: Oh, really?! What do they write about?

Only in English.

It's an English fucking word.

Re: Can we talk about the rude installers not asking for installation locations?

#70

Post by ttoinou »

powerhouse007 wrote: post #8
ttoinou wrote: post #2

More options, more mess. The user will always do something funky, then don't remember about it and then complain to the software publisher that it's not working correctly

If software allows changing install location, it should work from everywhere. And there's no excuse for hardcoding Program Files anymore with multiple package managers on windows. I feel your pain as a developer but as a user, sometimes I need the choice. Try to hide it so non-techies people can click Next Next Next but put it in advanced options somewhere.

  If software allows changing install location, it should work from everywhere
So, we're saying the same thing, what you said is the Contraposition of what I am saying, they are equivalent
Post reply on HN