Standardized Installers

As I typed the title, I just had a flash back of ACT, SAT, CAT (I think) tests that we all knew and loved back in our early days of schooling. Standardized Testing, oh how great it was, and made it nice for the schools to accurately judge our abilities.

However, as long of a post that could be, I'm not going to be talking about testing, but rather installers...specifically Microsoft Installers. I find it quite humorous to see that each application team at Microsoft has their own Installer. No, I'm not talking about the files contained with in them, but rather the look, feel, and structure of the various installers. I find it odd that a company that has created the Microsoft Installer, doesn't even have standards for their own installers. Sure, they may all use MSI as a base, but as an end user, having different UI's for installers can just get plain confusing.

To compare on contrast, you see installers for Office products that all have the same look & feel. Its a wizard type of UI that (I feel) all installers should follow. Why? Well, its simple, easy, intuitive, and common amongst a lot of applications installers in the market. However, on the contrary, installers for VS.NET, MSDN Help, Windows Media Player, DirectX (to just name a few), all have their own “look” to them. Sure, in a sense, they all have that base “wizardry” to them, but its convoluted by the pretty graphics and interesting ways of displaying information to them. I wouldn't actually mind seeing some sort of standardization come across Microsoft's installers, but who am I to speak. I'm a lonely voice in the world where I have no say against MS standards.

Just my thoughts..I don't expect you to agree or disagree, however it would be nice to have a good conversation on this topic.

No Comments