Many got it pre-installed with their machines. Sure Windows 7 may run on
pre-2007 machines if you bought it for over six thousand bucks, but that
still doesn't resolve another issue (which i forgot to mention) -
compatibility.
Gotta love that philosophy "who cares about 2.5GB or 8GB" - the operating
system starts doing it, and then all the programs follow. Remember MSN
Messenger 1.0? That was only a few hundred kilobytes to few megabytes to
install. Now its over 180MB to install.
Which application do you want to bloat today?
<ps... i think the thread has been derailed>
On Sun, 05 Jun 2011 05:34:20 +1000, Alex Ionescu <ion...@videotron.ca>
wrote:
Windows 7 runs on pre-2007 computers just fine, so that's irrelevant.
Windows 7 is available as a trial, and also for free for students, and
also for only 99$ as an upgrade to XP, which came out a decade ago. So
there's people who don't have 99$/10 years? How did they get XP then?
Windows 7 does not take up 15GB of disk space. A fresh install of
Ultimate uses 8.64GB.
If 8.64GB is too much, you can use Windows 7 for Thin PCs, which is in
CTP right now. It uses ~2.7GB of space for a fresh install, only
slightly higher than XP's 1.5.
(Also, who the cares about 2.5 or 8GB when you can get a 1TB disk for
100$ these days?)
--
Best regards,
Alex Ionescu
On 2011-06-04, at 3:03 PM, Adam wrote:
I am aware of that. I was talking about Microsoft Windows and not
ReactOS - and was responding to someone who suggested "Update to
Windows Vista+, which has KTM."
Please read the messages that are being replied to as well, other than
just the replies.
On Sun, 05 Jun 2011 04:53:43 +1000, Javier Agustìn Fernàndez Arroyo
<elh...@gmail.com> wrote:
Adam... ReactOS will not be Win Vista/7 ;)
On Sat, Jun 4, 2011 at 8:05 PM, Adam <geekdun...@gmail.com> wrote:
And what about people with computers older than 2007 and/or people
who do
not want to (and/or cannot) pay $$$ for an upgrade and/or people who
do not
want to install an operating system that takes up 15GB of disk space?
On Sun, 05 Jun 2011 03:59:46 +1000, Alex Ionescu <ion...@videotron.ca>
wrote:
Update to Windows Vista+, which has KTM.
--
Best regards,
Alex Ionescu
On 2011-06-04, at 10:21 AM, Adam wrote:
A number of times (eg. .NET install/AV install) I have had it happen
at
the end of the install. Then when I attempt to uninstall it there
are errors
produced regarding it (often not just after a fresh install of
Windows; I
mean after using the computer for some time - particularly after
updating
Windows Installer) then it makes the product difficult (if not
impossible)
to uninstall.
On Sun, 05 Jun 2011 00:07:44 +1000, Zachary Gorden <
drakekaizer...@gmail.com> wrote:
And how many times does the database get corrupted? I've never run
into
it
and the conditions that would cause a corruption would equally
screw any
other installer, since it would have to be a run that got
interrupted
mid-install.
On Sat, Jun 4, 2011 at 8:58 AM, Adam <geekdun...@gmail.com> wrote:
Next will you be suggesting for people to use MMC snapins as
opposed to
writing standalone applications, because it is shitty standalone
applications that do things and not MMC?
You can use WIX/MSI to write shitty installers too if I am not
mistaken.
I've seen brilliant NSIS/InstallShield installers and shitty MSI
installers.
And vice versa.
As an end-user I must say MSI also tends to piss me off,
particularly
when
the database gets corrupted and what not. Good concept though,
but I
question the way it is implemented. I have written about what I
think
about
MSI in another mail so no need for me to repeat myself.
But what I am trying to suggest is that shitty installers will be
shitty
installers. You can write shitty installers in
SuperDuperUltraInstallerLanguageSoGoodItIsGuaranteedToMakeOtherInstallersShitTheirPantsAndGoBankrupt
and they will still be shitty installers.
On Sat, 04 Jun 2011 23:49:26 +1000, Alex Ionescu
<ion...@videotron.ca>
wrote:
Oh, I do believe shitty software/installers do this.
Microsoft's technologies do not, however.
So use WIX/MSI, not NSI/InstallShield.
--
Best regards,
Alex Ionescu
On 2011-06-04, at 9:23 AM, Kamil Hornicek wrote:
I'm in charge of 40+ PCs running mostly XP at work. Believe me
when I
tell you people do write their own code (or use the available
API
incorrectly) for installers or some online activation bullshit.
I
came
across several installers/apps that were unable to detect or
use our
proxy
(we also use wpad for proxy autodiscovery via dns) and I always
had
to
connect that PC directly to our gateway to make stuff install
which
is
annoying as hell. I am not making this up, pay me a visit if you
think
otherwise.
K.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Alex Ionescu" <
ion...@videotron.ca>
To: "ReactOS Development List" <ros-dev@reactos.org>
Sent: Friday, June 03, 2011 8:20 PM
Subject: Re: [ros-dev] 1294 [dreimer] Fix clean for cmake
trees. ...
Again all of this is irrelevant: since I think you are a Linux
user,
I
can understand why you are confused.
On Windows, all HTTP communication is done by WinHTTP and/or
WinINET,
nobody writes their own custom socket code.
WinHTTP/WinINET control the proxy settings for the machine. In
fact,
if
you use Google Chrome on Windows (or Safari) and go to the
proxy/connection
settings, you will see "IE's" proxy connection dialog --
because
these
settings/dialog are owned by the OS Library, not the individual
applications.
Therefore, the installer will use 100% the same settings as
the web
browser, including the same protocol.
So, as I stated, if the browser can download foo.exe, so will
the
online
installer.
--
Best regards,
Alex Ionescu
On 2011-06-03, at 1:50 PM, Kamil Hornicek wrote:
whatever you use for downloading the installer has to be
configured
to
connect throught the proxy and also to use its dns services
for
host name
resolving. if the installer itself isn't aware of the need for
proxy server
(or is not able to connect through socks or whatever the proxy
uses) it
won't be usually able to resolve the hostname it's trying to
connect to
(depends on the exact network configuration). also the default
route to the
internet would be missing or direct outgoing connections
would be
blocked
(which they usually are otherwise you wouldn't be forced to
use the
proxy
server in the first place) so the traffic generated by the
installer
wouldn't have any means to reach its destination.
I didn't want to derail the discussion and I apologize for
that.
I'll
shut up next time.
Kamil
----- Original Message ----- From: "Alex Ionescu" <
ion...@videotron.ca
>
To: "ReactOS Development List" <ros-dev@reactos.org>
Sent: Friday, June 03, 2011 7:03 PM
Subject: Re: [ros-dev] 1294 [dreimer] Fix clean for cmake
trees.
...
Since online installers use HTTP, and the user got the
installer
off
HTTP, what would a proxy server change?
--
Best regards,
Alex Ionescu
On 2011-06-03, at 12:33 PM, Kamil Hornicek wrote:
I didn't want to spam this discussion but I have to.. What
every
other software company also does is refusing to believe
someone
might be
behind a proxy server. If you go this way, please make sure
the
installer
doesn't need a direct connection. Also online installers are
generally a
major pain in the ass if you don't provide an offline
installer
too.
----- Original Message ----- From: Alex Ionescu
To: ReactOS Development List
Sent: Friday, June 03, 2011 5:56 PM
Subject: Re: [ros-dev] 1294 [dreimer] Fix clean for cmake
trees.
...
Why separate installers for x64/ARM?
Just do what every software company this side of the century
does: a
400kb installer which lets you select the packages you
want, and
downloads
them.
--
Best regards,
Alex Ionescu
On 2011-06-03, at 11:38 AM, Zachary Gorden wrote:
Spoke with Amine and Daniel. I've agreed to the lesser
evil of
bundling the FULL cmake. Reasons are if we want the BE to
be
flexible
enough to be used for more than just building ROS, we can't
gimp
cmake with
the belief that no one will need the things we didn't
include.
This is again
on Windows. I remain uninvolved with decisions about the
Linux
BE.
On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 10:34 AM, Colin Finck
<co...@reactos.org>
wrote:
Timo Kreuzer <timo.kreu...@web.de> wrote:
My vote on this:
CMake: bundle it, optional on installation
x64/arm: create individual installers
* CMake: bundle it, go for the (minimal) version without an
installer. It's nothing "exotic" to install after all, just
put
it together
with the other utilities in RosBE.
* x64/arm: If build tool sizes are staying like this, create
individual installers. Just for testing, I'll try an x86/x64
multilib build
of Binutils and GCC though, would be nice to know how much
smaller it is
compared to separate x86 and x64 compilers.
So in general, I agree with Timo :-)
- Colin
_______________________________________________
Ros-dev mailing list
Ros-dev@reactos.org
http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
_______________________________________________
Ros-dev mailing list
Ros-dev@reactos.org
http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
_______________________________________________
Ros-dev mailing list
Ros-dev@reactos.org
http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
_______________________________________________
Ros-dev mailing list
Ros-dev@reactos.org
http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
_______________________________________________
Ros-dev mailing list
Ros-dev@reactos.org
http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
_______________________________________________
Ros-dev mailing list
Ros-dev@reactos.org
http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
_______________________________________________
Ros-dev mailing list
Ros-dev@reactos.org
http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
_______________________________________________
Ros-dev mailing list
Ros-dev@reactos.org
http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
_______________________________________________
Ros-dev mailing list
Ros-dev@reactos.org
http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
--
Using Opera's revolutionary email client:
http://www.opera.com/mail/
_______________________________________________
Ros-dev mailing list
Ros-dev@reactos.org
http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
--
Using Opera's revolutionary email client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
_______________________________________________
Ros-dev mailing list
Ros-dev@reactos.org
http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
_______________________________________________
Ros-dev mailing list
Ros-dev@reactos.org
http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
--
Using Opera's revolutionary email client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
_______________________________________________
Ros-dev mailing list
Ros-dev@reactos.org
http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
--
Using Opera's revolutionary email client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
_______________________________________________
Ros-dev mailing list
Ros-dev@reactos.org
http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
_______________________________________________
Ros-dev mailing list
Ros-dev@reactos.org
http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
--
Using Opera's revolutionary email client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
_______________________________________________
Ros-dev mailing list
Ros-dev@reactos.org
http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
