Article:		Easy Access to the Applications Folder from a Disk Image
Subject:		Why not copy it or create a package?
Date:		2005-09-02 22:33:12
From:		DaleG
The problem I have with the symlink approach is that a user will look at it and wonder why they have to do anything at all. Why doesn't the application just install into Applications itself, rather than making me just do a single drag to a folder in plain view? Your application could run some auto-install code each time it starts. If it finds it's being launched from its own disk image then it copies itself to /Applications. If there's already a copy of itself in this folder, it can ask the user whether to overwrite it or cancel the operation. CaminoKnight and NightShift already do this. It'd be interesting to see how they do this programatically. Alternatively, creating a simple package might be better. While it's a longer process, users are somewhat familiar with it.

Showing messages 1 through 5 of 5.

• Why not copy it or create a package?
  2005-09-03 14:06:17  cpruitt [View]
  
  
  NOOOOOOOO!!!! For the love of everything holy, dont encourage people to write installers for single bundle apps.
  
  Am I the only one that just hates installers with a passion? I totally dont trust them. I want to know every little thing that is installed on my system. I dont even like the fact that Applications can copy out bundle contents on first run without me knowing about it. Its not a matter of security as much as wanting to know where everything is and how to get it OFF my system. I'm always worried some plugin or service is being dunped in somewhere and will be hanging around long after I delete the app.
  
  I just hate installers... hate them. They're forever putting things where I dont want them. I dont want ANYTHING installed into /Library unles its ABSOLUTELY required. I dont back up /Library. I do back up ~/Library. I want all my resources inside my home folder. Installers never seem to give me this option & I'm always having to track down contextual manu's, pref panes, services & the like & moving them into my own folder.
  
  I could TOLLERATE installers if they were FORCED (even if it required me setting a "verbose install" option in the system preferences) to function as follows:
  
  Double Click...
  "You are about to install 'App Name'"
  "The folliwing files will be installed..."
  ... Insert Text view with complete copyable/savable/printable list of files to be installed & destinations ...
  "The Primary Application will be installed into /Applications. Would you like to change this?"
  Prompt: Change / Continue
  "Install resources for all users or ony the Current user?"
  Prompt: Current / All
  
  Also installers should ALWAYS offer an uninstall option. I'm so sick of having orphan files all over.
  
  As they are I just get annoyed every time an app uses one. I far prefer a simple drag & drop. Sorry to sound like a complainer but this is just a hot button issue for me.

• Why not copy it or create a package?
  2005-09-03 04:06:08  kool [View]
  
  
  Auto-installing applications should be very careful, as not everyone installs into /Applications e.g. if you don't have privileges there. And how about the test-drive? I don't copy something into my Applications immediately, only after giving it a test-drive when its stlll on the diskimage for example.
  
  If there is no need for an installer, do not use it. It's a bit of a black box to people. No idea what is going where. And also, I don't know what scripts it might be running before and/or after installation.
  
  One big problem with the Installer is that after it's finished it's not always clear what to do next. The user needs to go find the application in the Finder and double-click it.
• Why not copy it or create a package?
  2005-09-05 17:36:10  chris_barker [View]
  
  
  Installers are something from the Bad Old Days of Classic. If I never see one again its too soon for me. Unfortunately since I'll probably have to buy some more Adobe product I know I'll end up subjected to another installer coded up by some mouth breathing troglodyte.
  
  I'm also a member of the "test drive from Desktop" school. Partly because I've seen some updates to programs that broke features I liked so I dont always want to replace something that I know to be working.
  
  Whereas I feel sorry for the users who are too stupid or lazy to drag A to B, I must say that the article demonstrates a great way of handling this. It gives people the choice of quickly putting something in Applications or not.
  
  Draggable .App bundles are the best thing since sliced cheeze and I wish other OSen had the same concept.
• Why not copy it or create a package?
  2005-09-03 07:00:37  DaleG [View]
  
  
  That's right, not everyone installs every app into /Applications. I know I don't. Same with a test drive. I do these all from the Desktop while deciding whether to keep them.
  
  But the assumption in this article is that the app will get installed into /Applications, and that you have to make it as simple as possible for less capable users to do this. So your concerns aren't addressed by the article either.
  
  As far as users not knowing where to find the app in the Finder, the installer could either state where it's installed, or offer to start it automatically.
  
  NetNewsWire plugins install themselves by double-clicking, as do Apple Widgets.
• Why not copy it or create a package?
  2005-09-03 12:22:35  kool [View]
  
  
  In my opinion it would be best if the Installer reveals the application in the Finder after the installation. That way the user also learns where the application is saved.
  
  (for installations into different folders, it should be made possible to select the starting-point-file by the developer which the Installer can then reveal)