6 ms·

Wow... just downloaded the windows installer version and it autoinstalled itself wherever it chose fit, without questioning, it installed shortcuts on the start

Wow... just downloaded the windows installer version and it autoinstalled itself wherever it chose fit, without questioning, it installed shortcuts on the start menu, placed itself on an already bloated contextual menu on several file extensions as an Open option, instead on "Open with...", etc. I usually install software on my user folder on the work laptop, as I don't have enough priviledges. This time the installer worked, but why override the questions to the user, like install location, etc.? There's a standard for Windows installers, why did they ignore it? Not cool.

16bytes 11y ago
To be fair Chrome doesn't ask you either, at least on the storage location. It looks like Atom puts itself in APPDATA, which is the easiest place to install because you have known permissions and update strategies. I actually like this method. I agree that I didn't like the default shortcut and context menu entries, however.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- chii 11y ago
  i also hate that part of chrome - i don't have a fast disk on my default C drive, and i want to move my apps to a separate disk. But chrome doesn't let you do that easily...why do product teams think they can make the best choice for the user, without giving a way out? For a normal user, they can just use a default, and it should be fine. But let me choose if i want to, god damn it!
  - hobarrera 11y ago
    Can't you create a symlink to another drive, and keep chrome on the same logical location?
Cthulhu_ 11y ago
It's optimizing the onboarding and install process to its bare minimum. I'm sure they go "Well you don't get a choice for OSX or mobile apps either, so why should you for windows"? Actually they have a point. But Windows and PCs are not as straightforward as that.
- Zarel 11y ago
  You get a choice for OS X. You can put most apps wherever you want; just drag the .app "file" anywhere.
steve-howard 11y ago
I don't know if this has changed, but when I tried Atom and didn't like it, I discovered that there was no uninstaller. Hooray for deleting context menu entries by hand in the registry.
- wnevets 11y ago
  One of the first things I've noticed after trying out the new release, very annoying.
  - jules 11y ago
    Thanks for the heads up, I was about to try Atom but I'll wait until this is fixed.
- Jare 11y ago
  I was able to uninstall it from the Programs list and context menu entries are gone.
webwanderings 11y ago
I clicked the download button and noticed 70+ MB file. I thought to myself, why in the world a text editor needs to be so huge. And then I see your comment. I clicked on the Pause button on my download.
- outworlder 11y ago
  Did you intend to run it in a potato? Even a raspberry pi would have no difficulty with that file size. It's also packing a full browser, don't forget that. And likely all sorts of assets. I particularly don't care. I'm more interested in how it performs during use. By the way, task manager indicates it's using less then half that of RAM, with a few tabs open.
- z3t4 11y ago
  It comes with Chromium, that is basically a browser. They have their own version of Chromium called Electron. But I recommend nwjs instead, witch is also built on Chromium and nodejs. And lets you make packages that only include your source code, so that you don't have to download the "browser" for every app.
  - Cyph0n 11y ago
    Really? How is the app opened then without bundling Chromium? I built an app 4 months back and that was the only option.
    - yathern 11y ago
      It isn't really, but I guess it's so that in the future, if more apps are built with nwjs, it's possible to just download the 'runtime' and then each program sees if its installed, then downloads it if needed.
      - hobarrera 11y ago
        That's what we have package managers that handle dependencies for. Hopefully, that decade-old feature will be the future on windows too.
rwallace 11y ago
Personally I think there is something to be said for skipping irrelevant questions. I don't care where a program installs to, I just want it to work. I want the developers to deal with that kind of detail so I don't have to worry about it.
- keehun 11y ago
  See, for many, that is not an irrelevant question. Could be very important if you have multiple partitions/network drives specific for different purposes.
- kcbanner 11y ago
  The question isn't irrelevant.
bitmapbrother 11y ago
This frustrates me to no end. I prefer to install my software in a certain location. Having it selected for me is not okay. Nor is giving me the option to override it.
- tragic 11y ago
  > Nor is giving me the option to override it. Oh, come now. Even make install makes assumptions about default directories etc. The right to override is the correct level of control over target directories - people who care can make that call, and indeed will be looking for the opportunity. The rest of us would merely like to find our new piece of software in the start menu/spotlight/PATH.
deevus 11y ago
I have just pushed version 1.0 of Atom to the scoop-extras repository If you use Scoop, add the extras bucket using: scoop bucket add extras Then install atom scoop install atom It will install it into your user folder. No privileges required.
romanovcode 11y ago
The context menu is the most annoying thing. I can delete the shortcuts no problem, however to delete the context menu it requires some registry fiddling.

16bytes 11y ago

To be fair Chrome doesn't ask you either, at least on the storage location. It looks like Atom puts itself in APPDATA, which is the easiest place to install because you have known permissions and update strategies. I actually like this method. I agree that I didn't like the default shortcut and context menu entries, however.

deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
chii 11y ago
i also hate that part of chrome - i don't have a fast disk on my default C drive, and i want to move my apps to a separate disk. But chrome doesn't let you do that easily...why do product teams think they can make the best choice for the user, without giving a way out? For a normal user, they can just use a default, and it should be fine. But let me choose if i want to, god damn it!
- hobarrera 11y ago
  Can't you create a symlink to another drive, and keep chrome on the same logical location?

Cthulhu_ 11y ago

It's optimizing the onboarding and install process to its bare minimum. I'm sure they go "Well you don't get a choice for OSX or mobile apps either, so why should you for windows"? Actually they have a point. But Windows and PCs are not as straightforward as that.

Zarel 11y ago
You get a choice for OS X. You can put most apps wherever you want; just drag the .app "file" anywhere.

steve-howard 11y ago

I don't know if this has changed, but when I tried Atom and didn't like it, I discovered that there was no uninstaller. Hooray for deleting context menu entries by hand in the registry.

wnevets 11y ago
One of the first things I've noticed after trying out the new release, very annoying.
- jules 11y ago
  Thanks for the heads up, I was about to try Atom but I'll wait until this is fixed.
Jare 11y ago
I was able to uninstall it from the Programs list and context menu entries are gone.

webwanderings 11y ago

I clicked the download button and noticed 70+ MB file. I thought to myself, why in the world a text editor needs to be so huge. And then I see your comment. I clicked on the Pause button on my download.

outworlder 11y ago
Did you intend to run it in a potato? Even a raspberry pi would have no difficulty with that file size. It's also packing a full browser, don't forget that. And likely all sorts of assets. I particularly don't care. I'm more interested in how it performs during use. By the way, task manager indicates it's using less then half that of RAM, with a few tabs open.
z3t4 11y ago
It comes with Chromium, that is basically a browser. They have their own version of Chromium called Electron. But I recommend nwjs instead, witch is also built on Chromium and nodejs. And lets you make packages that only include your source code, so that you don't have to download the "browser" for every app.
- Cyph0n 11y ago
  Really? How is the app opened then without bundling Chromium? I built an app 4 months back and that was the only option.
  - yathern 11y ago
    It isn't really, but I guess it's so that in the future, if more apps are built with nwjs, it's possible to just download the 'runtime' and then each program sees if its installed, then downloads it if needed.
    - hobarrera 11y ago
      That's what we have package managers that handle dependencies for. Hopefully, that decade-old feature will be the future on windows too.

rwallace 11y ago

Personally I think there is something to be said for skipping irrelevant questions. I don't care where a program installs to, I just want it to work. I want the developers to deal with that kind of detail so I don't have to worry about it.

keehun 11y ago
See, for many, that is not an irrelevant question. Could be very important if you have multiple partitions/network drives specific for different purposes.
kcbanner 11y ago
The question isn't irrelevant.

bitmapbrother 11y ago

This frustrates me to no end. I prefer to install my software in a certain location. Having it selected for me is not okay. Nor is giving me the option to override it.

tragic 11y ago
> Nor is giving me the option to override it. Oh, come now. Even make install makes assumptions about default directories etc. The right to override is the correct level of control over target directories - people who care can make that call, and indeed will be looking for the opportunity. The rest of us would merely like to find our new piece of software in the start menu/spotlight/PATH.

deevus 11y ago

I have just pushed version 1.0 of Atom to the scoop-extras repository If you use Scoop, add the extras bucket using: scoop bucket add extras Then install atom scoop install atom It will install it into your user folder. No privileges required.

romanovcode 11y ago

The context menu is the most annoying thing. I can delete the shortcuts no problem, however to delete the context menu it requires some registry fiddling.