Their Teams uninstaller isn't quite as good - it just doesn't uninstall all the crap that the Teams malware has left behind. I still have a stray MS Teams audio device left on my macOS machine.
Did you considered filling a bug report ?
Any sufficiently advanced uninstaller is indistinguishable from malware
141–150 of 556 posts
Re: Any sufficiently advanced uninstaller is indistinguishable from malware
#142I keep forgetting Windows-isms that won't allow you to delete the executable file of a running process. I guess that's also why the arcane .dll upgrade process / WoW is so necessary.
Any open file
Re: Any sufficiently advanced uninstaller is indistinguishable from malware
#143Software shouldn't uninstall or update itself. There should be a package manager to do this. Then at least you have one attack vector less per application.
If browsers werent updating itself we would have huge security mess
Re: Any sufficiently advanced uninstaller is indistinguishable from malware
#144I can only imagine the Win32 API team meeting prior to this... A: So, people are resorting to injecting code in Explorer to delete in-use files in such numbers that it shows up in our top-100 crash report reasons B: Well, maybe we should add a public API to Windows to support this incredibly common functionality that apparently has been missing so far? A: Nah, let's just write a mildly condescending blog post that re…
This. The deep dive is fascinating, but really feels like a distraction from a product management failure. Microsoft has been 3 decades in the OS business. Surely someone must have noticed that package management should be a core OS feature.
Re: Any sufficiently advanced uninstaller is indistinguishable from malware
#145Earlier quoted context omitted.
You don't? Those are either free space, or held by handle by a running process, so you just leave them be and assume they will be released sooner or later. Worst case you defragment on boot. https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/68523/find-and-remo... This is how it works on UNIX. Generally better then apps randomly failing because a file(name) is held open somewhere by something.
> You don't? Those are either free space, or held by handle by a running process, so you just leave them be and assume they will be released sooner or later. Well that's what I was getting at, it would suck to not be able to move around file blocks just because a process is using the file. That "sooner or later" might well be "until the next reboot". The current strategy makes it possible to live-shrink and live-defr…
Re: Any sufficiently advanced uninstaller is indistinguishable from malware
#146And today I learned that Windows supports running Javascript as shell script. huh
Re: Any sufficiently advanced uninstaller is indistinguishable from malware
#147Re: Any sufficiently advanced uninstaller is indistinguishable from malware
#148If Microsoft just made uninstalling work properly themselves maybe people wouldn’t have to resort to uninstallers in the first place
Now they aren't Apple, in telling developers "use this or get lost".
Re: Any sufficiently advanced uninstaller is indistinguishable from malware
#149Re: Any sufficiently advanced uninstaller is indistinguishable from malware
#150...or maybe Windows should just offer an API for marking a file for deletion once it's not in use anymore (I understand unlink semantics may not be possible, but that's not what my suggestion above is saying)
I thought I'll be the guy to point out that once again mandatory file locking is to blame, but you beat me to it. I never digged into the question, but why is it used, what benefits did it provide over the UNIX unlink behaviour?
And with it, less data corruption issues.