5 ms·
Windows needs proper package management. Having each application be responsible for its own installation, uninstallation[0] and updates is so last millennium.
by Zak 16y ago
Windows needs proper package management. Having each application be responsible for its own installation, uninstallation[0] and updates is so last millennium.
Debian and its derivatives have done a good job of it in the Linux world, though they haven't done as well as they could at convincing third-parties to integrate. Google Chrome is an example of how to do integration right: the download is a .deb, and installing it adds Chrome's repository, so you get automatic updates through apt. A repository containing almost every library dependency that's likely to show up along with automatic dependency resolution and updates makes life better for both users and developers.
MS could provide similar functionality for Windows. The lack of an (almost) everything is open source culture on Windows would, of course make some things harder, but it's also a huge opportunity for MS: they could integrate an app store. How best to run an app store is still being explored, but here's what I'd do if I were in charge of such a project at MS:
* Make the standardized packaging format very preferable. Make the tools for creating packages open-source and easy to use. Make the question asked of the user clear and friendly ("Do you want to install Foo app from Bar company?", not "This requires administrative privileges..."). Make verifying your identity as a developer to sign apps with a MS-issued key free and easy.
* Allow side channels: packages installed by other means could add their own repository and use the central update mechanism. Allow them to hook in to the payment mechanism too, otherwise we'll see annoying in-app payments.
* Avoid any attempt to lock in developers to your store as the sales channel: developers will prefer it because users will prefer it. If users don't prefer it, make it better.
* Allow anything non-malicious, but tag things that would offend a large percentage of users. Hide those by default.
[0] Yes, there's a centralized UI for uninstalling well-behaved applications, but that's not the point
- blasdel 16y agoIt's called MSI, the downloaded files may behave like they're standalone exes, but they're really just bundles of data and scripts for the Windows Installer to take care of. Apple's PKG / Installer.app setup on OS X is very similar. Both are clear platform defaults, with nearly all non-legacy shit using them. In Vista Microsoft implemented a central update mechanism / repository for third-party drivers, but it's fairly hidden from the user. Apple did something similar in 10.6 for on-demand printer drivers (which previously took up 3gb in the default install) and optional OS features like Rosetta. Neither could realistically get away with implementing anything that looked like a desktop App Store, no matter how many convenient side channels and alternate repos there were. The amount of drama that would go down just isn't worth it to them.
- Zak 16y agoPeople whining about it is probably a good indication that it's worth doing. If Microsoft fails to do things that are good for all of its users and most of its developers because somebody might bitch about it, the company is as good as dead.