3 ms·
I'm constantly annoyed by "Advanced user" installation options. They're occasionally accurate - I can think of a few programs where the "advanced" option deman
by Bartweiss 10y ago
I'm constantly annoyed by "Advanced user" installation options.
They're occasionally accurate - I can think of a few programs where the "advanced" option demanded that I go and read a bunch of documentation - but mostly it's either laziness or malice. I don't think they've been a reasonable choice since storage was so limited that 'advanced' meant screwing around with DirectX directories and partial installs.
In 90%+ of cases, basic/advanced could be better addressed with a handful of simple-English checkboxes for what to install. One is locked-active, for the core bundle. The others have one-line descriptions of what they do and possibly what other products make them redundant, maybe with a "more info" button.
And since evil bloatware isn't going anywhere, we could at least set a norm that real menus give you options, and anyone trying to prevent you from engaging your brain is pushing crapware.
- paulryanrogers 10y agoAfter being burned by ATI and Nvidia driver installs gone bad I'm reluctant to use anything but the defaults. Software SDKs too seem especially brittle when installed apart from the recommended options. So it's not only casual users who prefer the default.
- Bartweiss 10y agoI would probably make an exception for driver installs, which definitely get into that "actually broken" territory. I'm also ok with "detect my device settings automatically". I was mostly thinking about the program installs where 'advanced' is a list of different things you might want to install. The worst case there is pretty much just "you didn't install the thing you wanted", versus the "good luck buddy" worst case of tools and drivers.