6 ms·

Let's face it, the current way of installing applications in OS X is extremely confusing for newcomers to the platform. Apple should be lauded for trying someth

Let's face it, the current way of installing applications in OS X is extremely confusing for newcomers to the platform. Apple should be lauded for trying something that is proven on iOS devices and getting it to work on OS X. Additionally, the Mac App Store is opt-in and there is no indication that it will be the only way to install binaries. Let's not get ahead of ourselves in the conspiracy theories.

deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
catshirt 16y ago
i might be a little biased here but really- "extremely confusing"?
bad_user 16y ago
When people have been saying that the App Store model will happen on OS X, and that OS X and iOS are merging, this is an obvious step in that direction. This is Trusted Computing happening, albeit on a smaller scale; and Apple can do what Microsoft couldn't ... get people excited about it (same as with DRM).
narkee 16y ago
Confusing? Users either run a package installer, basically identical to installation wizards on Windows, or plop a *.app in the Applications folder. Under what circumstances is either of those options "extremely confusing"?
- mishmash 16y ago
  At the same time disk images are essential for power users, they are just as confusing for typical users.
- GHFigs 16y ago
  The trouble with your question is that you've left out any mention of the .dmg that the user actually downloaded. Don't get me wrong, I like disk images as much as the next nerd, but it has been my observation that there are way too many ways for the process of getting from .dmg to in-dock-ready-to-rock to go awry. People can and do figure it out, but the process is still far from optimal. "Internet Enabled" disk images were an attempt to deal with this, but not every application ships as one, not every browser supports them, and plenty of people have the auto-open option turned off in Safari either because they think it's obnoxious or insecure. (And even if it works perfectly--even if the .dmg turns directly into an .app--the .app ends up in ~/Downloads/. Where for some it will forever remain.) So you're left, at least some of the time, with this file icon with a weird silvery box thing on it. If you're lucky ("you" being both CEO of n00b, Inc. and Mayor of n00btown) the download page of the application (or if you figured out how to mount the .dmg, within the .dmg itself) you just downloaded has instructions on where to go from here. (Instructions which you, Hacker News reader, have seen a million times without ever really noticing that they are a symptom of a problem.) But let's suppose there are no instructions. But you can figure this out. You're Mayor of N00btown, after all. So you double-click the .dmg and here's a new window, and yay, there's the app icon. ::click click::. Yay! Bouncing icon in the Dock! It works! And it will probably continue to work just fine...until you shut down or restart (which could be six months from now--given how busy and productive you all are at n00b, Inc. you can't afford to waste time every week on "Software Updates") at which point your disk images unmount and suddenly some of your programs just don't work anymore! So you download them again... The thing is, none of this (the many ways users can fail with installation) is so disastrous or commonplace that it constitutes an Obvious Problem that Must Be Addressed. Even in the above scenario (which is only a little contrived) the applications still actually work. The user is not confused, but there is still a pathology at play. The user does not go complain to their nerd until things actually fail, and the nerd typically puts a band-aid on it and asks the user to stop doing the wrong thing, while the root problem persists. My point being that even if the ".app inside a .dmg" approach to installation isn't "extremely confusing" (and I would agree, even after the above, that it is not) it still has an unnecessary capacity for undesirable side effects (including confusion) that you don't see with an app store or repository approach.
- pornel 16y ago
  > Under what circumstances is either of those options "extremely confusing"? When you're on the phone explaining this to someone. There's too many things that can go wrong: 1. User may launch the app from .dmg, even after they've copied it. It's an icon, it works! …but later image won't unmount, app will "disappear" after reboot or will take ages to launch. 2. User needs to drag the app to Applications folder. Not Dock. Dragging to dock will seem to work, but will cause problems like #1. 3. You have to explain that dragging of disk image icon (icon that needs to be found on cluttered desktop) to trash won't delete anything. And then you have to explain that the .dmg which wasn't deleted can be deleted. And of course user should drag to trash both icon representations of the .dmg, but not any file from within .dmg! They all need to end up in trash, except some of the icons can be dragged to trash, and some not. And order matters.
- brisance 16y ago
  Here are some things that can lead to a sub-optimal user experience: 1) User forgets or does not know the administrator password to install into /Applications 2) Loses license key to activate paid application 3) Installs application into ~/Applications instead of /Applications and thus when another user logs in, is unable to launch it 4) Fails to unmount and delete disk image when installation is complete and thus has ~/Downloads (the default download directory) full of them
powrtoch 16y ago
I still don't know where this objection comes from. I have been asked by non-techie friends many, many times for help with their computers. None of my friends, PC or Mac, have ever had to ask how to install an application. I consider the process(es) to be extremely self-explanatory. Apparently there are others out there who don't feel this way, and have encountered evidence of people being confused by it. I accept this, I just don't get it.
- Anechoic 16y ago
  None of my friends, PC or Mac, have ever had to ask how to install an application. I can say the same thing (that no one has asked for help to install an app) but then again my PC friends have fifty browsers toolbars and five AV software packages installed and my Mac friends are running apps directly from disk images. An app store isn't for me, but it definitely fits a need.

deleted 16y ago

[deleted]

catshirt 16y ago

i might be a little biased here but really- "extremely confusing"?

bad_user 16y ago

When people have been saying that the App Store model will happen on OS X, and that OS X and iOS are merging, this is an obvious step in that direction. This is Trusted Computing happening, albeit on a smaller scale; and Apple can do what Microsoft couldn't ... get people excited about it (same as with DRM).

narkee 16y ago

Confusing? Users either run a package installer, basically identical to installation wizards on Windows, or plop a *.app in the Applications folder. Under what circumstances is either of those options "extremely confusing"?

mishmash 16y ago
At the same time disk images are essential for power users, they are just as confusing for typical users.
GHFigs 16y ago
The trouble with your question is that you've left out any mention of the .dmg that the user actually downloaded. Don't get me wrong, I like disk images as much as the next nerd, but it has been my observation that there are way too many ways for the process of getting from .dmg to in-dock-ready-to-rock to go awry. People can and do figure it out, but the process is still far from optimal. "Internet Enabled" disk images were an attempt to deal with this, but not every application ships as one, not every browser supports them, and plenty of people have the auto-open option turned off in Safari either because they think it's obnoxious or insecure. (And even if it works perfectly--even if the .dmg turns directly into an .app--the .app ends up in ~/Downloads/. Where for some it will forever remain.) So you're left, at least some of the time, with this file icon with a weird silvery box thing on it. If you're lucky ("you" being both CEO of n00b, Inc. and Mayor of n00btown) the download page of the application (or if you figured out how to mount the .dmg, within the .dmg itself) you just downloaded has instructions on where to go from here. (Instructions which you, Hacker News reader, have seen a million times without ever really noticing that they are a symptom of a problem.) But let's suppose there are no instructions. But you can figure this out. You're Mayor of N00btown, after all. So you double-click the .dmg and here's a new window, and yay, there's the app icon. ::click click::. Yay! Bouncing icon in the Dock! It works! And it will probably continue to work just fine...until you shut down or restart (which could be six months from now--given how busy and productive you all are at n00b, Inc. you can't afford to waste time every week on "Software Updates") at which point your disk images unmount and suddenly some of your programs just don't work anymore! So you download them again... The thing is, none of this (the many ways users can fail with installation) is so disastrous or commonplace that it constitutes an Obvious Problem that Must Be Addressed. Even in the above scenario (which is only a little contrived) the applications still actually work. The user is not confused, but there is still a pathology at play. The user does not go complain to their nerd until things actually fail, and the nerd typically puts a band-aid on it and asks the user to stop doing the wrong thing, while the root problem persists. My point being that even if the ".app inside a .dmg" approach to installation isn't "extremely confusing" (and I would agree, even after the above, that it is not) it still has an unnecessary capacity for undesirable side effects (including confusion) that you don't see with an app store or repository approach.
pornel 16y ago
> Under what circumstances is either of those options "extremely confusing"? When you're on the phone explaining this to someone. There's too many things that can go wrong: 1. User may launch the app from .dmg, even after they've copied it. It's an icon, it works! …but later image won't unmount, app will "disappear" after reboot or will take ages to launch. 2. User needs to drag the app to Applications folder. Not Dock. Dragging to dock will seem to work, but will cause problems like #1. 3. You have to explain that dragging of disk image icon (icon that needs to be found on cluttered desktop) to trash won't delete anything. And then you have to explain that the .dmg which wasn't deleted can be deleted. And of course user should drag to trash both icon representations of the .dmg, but not any file from within .dmg! They all need to end up in trash, except some of the icons can be dragged to trash, and some not. And order matters.
brisance 16y ago
Here are some things that can lead to a sub-optimal user experience: 1) User forgets or does not know the administrator password to install into /Applications 2) Loses license key to activate paid application 3) Installs application into ~/Applications instead of /Applications and thus when another user logs in, is unable to launch it 4) Fails to unmount and delete disk image when installation is complete and thus has ~/Downloads (the default download directory) full of them

powrtoch 16y ago

I still don't know where this objection comes from. I have been asked by non-techie friends many, many times for help with their computers. None of my friends, PC or Mac, have ever had to ask how to install an application. I consider the process(es) to be extremely self-explanatory. Apparently there are others out there who don't feel this way, and have encountered evidence of people being confused by it. I accept this, I just don't get it.

Anechoic 16y ago
None of my friends, PC or Mac, have ever had to ask how to install an application. I can say the same thing (that no one has asked for help to install an app) but then again my PC friends have fifty browsers toolbars and five AV software packages installed and my Mac friends are running apps directly from disk images. An app store isn't for me, but it definitely fits a need.