Hey everytwo. I'm having quite an internal conflict. The way it started is long and irrelevant and I'm tryna get back into shortening my overly verbose posts. So, with specific regard to freeware and donationware distribution formats on the Windows-PC platform:
zip/etc......VS.....msi/exe
In other words, archive VS installer or Self-Extracting Archive. Here's the pro's and cons I've already thought about.
PRO'S
zip
- Transparency: the user knows the installer won't do malicious things
- Economical for developers (no purchase of expensive install-tools)
- Easy for developers (no setting up a million events, etc.)
- Somewhat smaller file size.
- Can update archive with a single drag 'n drop
installers
- Can setup automatic dependency checks (eg DirectX)
- Can setup specific task (eg: keys to add to registry, cleanup)
- Automated process is simpler on users who aren't very cmputer literate
CONS
zip
- No automated process, user must know how to extract files
- Software must be 100% portable (not actually a bad thing)
- No setup events, software needs to run checks on first run
- Doesn't come across as very professional
installers
- Hassle with licensing sometimes
- Freeware ones seem to mess up builds a lot
- Decent install-maker software costs money
- Install-makers can be a hassle (not the most valid point I know, lol)
- Needs to be completely rebuilt for the smallest change.
- Some installers become outdated or have dependencies themselves
So, does anybody have an answer as to which they think is better? Any pro's or cons I haven't though of? Can anyone invalidate anything I've mentioned, eg "WTH, 99% of users could extract a zip file" or "Have you tried this freeware install-maker <insert link>?"
Thanks, I really value everyone's input. I want to be able to weight this up with more than just my perspective in mind.
"Quotes in signatures are just stupid, especially if you're quoting yourself" ~ me