I originally posted this in the Eagle thread but very soon realized that it had nothing to do with the plane and hence did not belong there. So, here's what I had to say:Why do some developers release their products ONLY as an EXE installer? I understand that there might be people out there who simply can't grasp a manual installation, but why not offer a simple ZIP package of all files as a secondary means of installation for those who do "get it"?I'm not even being paranoid about virii or trojans - I don't like EXE installers for FS9 add-ons simply because:A) you can never tell what files they leave on the computer and where, same with registry entries:( most of them leave an entry in the "add / remove programs" list. I don't WANT to clutter this list with all the planes and sceneries I'd like to install :/ It's already stupid enough that stuff like Acrobat Reader updates show up in here as separate entriesSure I can install the add-ons to a temporary directory, copy it elsewhere and then "uninstall" it to get rid of the entry in add / remove programs, but that's no guarantee that everything has been removed.Can you tell I like my Windows neat and clean? ;) If I could, I'd use SandboxIE but it doesn't run in 64-bit Windows yet.So.. acknowledging the fact that these things are FREE and us end-users can not go about demanding this and demanding that because we're not paying the developers for their hard work, would it be too much to ask freeware developers to offer two packages of their products: one with an EXE installer and one without?Thoughts?

I agree with everything you say, but I can't answer your question about why some developers use auto installers. I guess that some of them fear that some users will mess up a manual install, which might result in lots of help me emails. No doubt, someone will illuminate us?

Yeah, since I really wanted to get the Antilles 2004 scenery I went with the autoinstaller.. WOOHA there goes my scenery cfg down the drain, wonder how it assembled the new one it left me (without backup..) I'LL (hopefully) NEVER do that again.For the life I cannot answer your question..-dasher7

A lot of people can't live without them, Janne, so that's the argument in their favour. However, there are a number of things that can be done in the compilation of uploads if freeware developers will take the time to consider them:1. In the descriptive part of the install process, TELL people what is to be installed and where.2. Give people the OPTION to install to a temporary directory.3. Do NOT enable the creation of a PROGRAM FILES entry or desktop icon.4. Do not create uninstall files.These things are easily done if developers will only think about them. I hate installers myself, as 50% of the ones I have ever been obliged to negotiate have been flawed in some way; so the above is important. If this is done, then a separate zip file is not necessary, perhaps.MarkMark "Dark Moment" BeaumontVP Fleet, DC-3 AirwaysTeam Member, MAAM-SIM[a href=http://www.swiremariners.com/cathayhk.html" target="_blank]http://www.paxship.com/maamlogo2.jpg[/a]

I'm sure avoiding installation confusion (and resulting support requests) is one reason for using installers, and I have no problem with that. It's just the lack of an alternate option to those who want to do it "by hand" that bothers me :/ Mark,The points you list would go a long way to ease my mind, but still.. I think installers should be such that they contain one ZIP file with all of the files in proper directories, and one EXE file which simply places the contents of the ZIP where they belong.This way both sides would be happy - those who don't want to do a manual install would use the installer and those who wouldn't have it any other way could simply open the ZIP file and do it manually.But I guess the installer programs available to developers aren't capable of this and the developers themselves certainly don't want to build a custom installer themselves.If only someone in the Flight Simming community would have the skills, time and interest to create an installer such as that for add-on developers :/

Janne, that is perfectly possible - given that all EXE installers have to be put into a zip for upload anyway - but it would effectively double the file size of any download.No, if at all, they should produce both zip and installer as options, perhaps, and as separate downloads - I do that with some of my own work for DCA - but if the installer itself gives the user the choice of install path i.e. to a temp directory, then that is really not necessary.I never, ever, use or download from an installer that does not give me the option of a temporary install. Much too dangerous. Mark "Dark Moment" BeaumontVP Fleet, DC-3 AirwaysTeam Member, MAAM-SIM[a href=http://www.swiremariners.com/cathayhk.html" target="_blank]http://www.paxship.com/maamlogo2.jpg[/a]

Well, I don't like exe installer too. When it's the choosen mean, I install to temporary folder and, from there, i COPY the different files and folders to the appropriate FS ones, then I uninstall from the temporary folder. This way I have total control over what goes where.Hugo

Double the size? How come?Maybe I wasn't clear on what I meant, so let me explain.Currently installers look like this (when unpacked from their release ZIP files):INSTALLER.EXE (15 megabytes)(maybe some other support files, readmes, etc)The INSTALLER.EXE file is both the installer program and the file container - when it is run, it unpacks its contents and places them according to the developers' wishes into a location the user points to.What I'm proposing is this:INSTALLER.EXE (0.5 megabytes)CONTENTS.ZIP (14.5 megabytes)(maybe some other support files, readmes, etc)In my example the INSTALLER.EXE file is nothing more than a program which asks the user where the add-on should be installed, and then places the contents of CONTENTS.ZIP in that location with proper folder structure.If the user wishes to install manually, he simply needs to open CONTENTS.ZIP and unpack it where he wants.I believe this kind of an installer would serve both sides of the issue equally well and I fail to see how it would double add-on package size?

I had a horror story in 2003 :(A freeware weather program used an EXE installer. The program "over wrote" an existing "Uninstall.exe" with a new Uninstall.exe. I didn't know this until I tried to uninstall another addon. I clicked on the Uninstall.exe and it screwed my registry :(Personally I hate EXE installers ....

Those who contend that they aren't comfortable installing scenery(or anything else) manually, can always resort to using the hints within the "Learning Centre".....but then that would mean doing some reading, etc. I too, think long and hard before downloading self-installing files.

>What I'm proposing is this:>>INSTALLER.EXE (0.5 megabytes)>CONTENTS.ZIP (14.5 megabytes)>(maybe some other support files, readmes, etc)Actually, that's how FS itself is installed. The .exe file simply un-CABs the multiple .CAB files. That's precisely why MS developed the .CAB system... ;)

Exactly - and I feel it would work just fine with add-ons, too (except that ZIP files are probably more familiar to the average user than CABs).

And there have been other examples of freeware installers deleting the entire FS2002/2004 installation. I will never use a freeware installer directly on the FS2004 installation and I only use those from payware companies that I trust.Doug

The same problem irritates me as well and I use an old utility called INCTRL 3 which was written for Windows 95 by Neil J. Rubenking of PC Magazine. It was freeware then. (In fact I recall laboriously typing in the code from the pages of the mag - that gives you some idea of how ancient a fossil I am :-) ) Believe it or not it works perfectly with Windows XP and Windows x64.What it does is this:You run INCTRL and specify the install program that you wish to monitor.INCTRL then takes a "snapshot" of all drives that you specify as well as the registry and any .INI files you care to specify.The install program runs and installs whatever it is supposed to. When the entire process is finished, INCTRL asks you to confirm that the entire installation procedure is completed. Then it takes another "snapshot" and compares the diffences and writes out a txt file listing every new file, every changed file and every added entry in the registry. You can save this txt file for future reference. Now you have CONTROL and can manually reverse anything that the install program did. It's a wonderful little utility.The program itself leaves no trace of itself - no registry entry, nothing. It's absolutely clean and leaves no mess behind!I went looking for a link to post here for downloading, but for some reason, ZDNET don't seem to have it on their site. However, I'm sure you can google it somewhere.GreetingsDave Britzius(Cape Town)

Donny AKA ShalomarFly 2 ROCKS!!!I use FSManager 2.8, and it finds errors with planes with installers surprisingly often. I think there's an option to supervise the install, just got it yesterday and still reading the docs.Best Regards, Donny:-wave