To anyone who will listen,
I recently found a topic (http://www.simtropolis.com/forum/messageview.cfm?catid=22&threadid=118912) on Simtropolis about the over-the-top implementation of installers. Let me start by saying that I have never agreed more with estonianman, and I thought of making a topic here since installers dominate the LEX.
There were various points made against the use of installers:
- It wastes everyone's time. Not only does the downloader have to waste time accepting a common-sense EULA and post-Vista users having to grant security privileges, but the uploader has to waste their time making the installer when it could simply be zipped up.
- Incompatibility for Mac. Also going back to wasting time, the uploader has to make a Mac-compatible ZIP (which you could just use for Windows as well), or force them to use FileJuicer. FileJuicer is not free, and those who can't pay for it (for example me, only being 13) get left in the dark once the trial expires.
- Potential for inflation. To store the EULA, interface, and the files could possibly (but not always) cause the filesize to inflate, going against one of the points of using an installer.
- Antivirus software/post-Vista. Users using McAfee may have to deal with their antivirus asking if the user wants to execute this file, may refuse to run the file, or may not download it in the first place if it has a web filter.
- The uploader is liable for any mistakes in
installation the installer.
- User loses ability to organize their plugins folder efficiently. The installer is, instead, going to unzip where it feels like. In some cases, the user could specify a directory, but that's just a lot more time wasted.
- The readmes that pop up in your web browser without your permission. Seriously? I know what I downloaded, I know what the dependencies are. It would make life easier if these were just listed in the description.
The list goes on. Of course, the NAM, RHW, NWM, CAM, etc. are all excluded from the rant because there are a multitude of options the user has to specify. While the point of the installers may be to make life easier for users, it does nothing but complicate installation. What happens when a new player finds out where the plugins folder is? More frustration. It would be, again, easier to leave a note saying "Unzip to My Documents\SimCity 4\Plugins" or wherever needed.
So the question is,
why do uploaders continue to use these installers when their over-the-top usage just makes things harder? If WinRAR or WinZip... even
Windows without a ZIP handler can mass extract these files to our plugins folder, how would it ever be easier to make the user unzip each individual file to run an installer one-by-one?
While I totally agree with you on a few points, I'd like to make a few remarks:
- UAC can be turned off (although in Vista that means you'll get an annoying red cross in your taskbar)
- You can also just run the installer from within the zip file (I always do that, since it saves time because unzipping every installer would take the rest of my life)
Quote from: WC_EEND on December 02, 2010, 01:41:18 PM
While I totally agree with you on a few points, I'd like to make a few remarks:
- UAC can be turned off (although in Vista that means you'll get an annoying red cross in your taskbar)
Valid point, but some users won't attempt it thinking it'll compromise their security.
Quote
- You can also just run the installer from within the zip file (I always do that, since it saves time because unzipping every installer would take the rest of my life)
Still a waste of time when mass extraction can be done.
Well, I don't really mind installers. They are actually a better option when you have to choose some details for your plugins (the NAM installer is a good example). Having readmes like "copy folder X if you want to have Euro textures or copy folder Y if you want standard US ones" is more confusing for the average player.
Quote from: simmaster07 on December 02, 2010, 01:28:20 PM
- User loses ability to organize their plugins folder efficiently. The installer is, instead, going to unzip where it feels like. In some cases, the user could specify a directory, but that's just a lot more time wasted.
On this point here, I've had several installers that once I change the installation directory, it still installs it to where
it wants to, not where I just told it too. I'm pretty sure this mostly happens with a few specific uploaders.
Quote from: io_bg on December 02, 2010, 01:48:09 PM
Well, I don't really mind installers. They are actually a better option when you have to choose some details for your plugins (the NAM installer is a good example). Having readmes like "copy folder X if you want to have Euro textures or copy folder Y if you want standard US ones" is more confusing for the average player.
As I said, the NAM, RHW, CAM, and similar installers that require the user to choose what components to install are exempt from the rant. Though there are many installers on the LEX that are over-the-top, like texture packs that can simply be unzipped.
I agree. Some add-ons, like N.A.M. and C.A.M., need the installer because they contain plenty of options that the user has to specify in the beginning. Just unzip them and remove anything you don't want is confusing and time consuming. Other add-ons, like SimMars, are just too big to just unzip them. But installers everywhere? Even for a small house, a little shop or a tiny collection of props? Isn't that a bit too much? &mmm
I don't tink that installers are obligatory in the LEX, it's just usual.
EDIT: I checked LEX candidacy guide and didn't find something about installers ()stsfd()
Quote from: Girafe on December 02, 2010, 02:11:29 PM
I don't tink that installers are obligatory in the LEX, it's just usual.
EDIT: I checked LEX candidacy guide and didn't find something about installers ()stsfd()
Missing the point: this topic is about the uploading of unnecessary installers regardless,
not how "installers are obligatory in the LEX"
For me it's quite the same,
you have pro and cons, and if it's not necessary and not obligatory it's up to you to use it or not ()what()
Maybe for some people it's just a preference (maybe more professional than a zip) even if like said before there is lot of situations where we don't need installers.
Installers aren't required for the Lex - I never use them and wouldn't be releasing on the Lex if they were mandatory.
Pet hate - I'lll say no more. It's been debated over and over ever since they first appeared.
Quote from: Girafe on December 02, 2010, 02:21:34 PM
For me it's quite the same,
you have pro and cons, and if it's not necessary and not obligatory it's up to you to use it or not ()what()
Maybe for some people it's just a preference (maybe more professional than a zip) even if like said before there is lot of situations where we don't need installers.
And while we have the freedom of choice, it gets annoying when the high-quality uploads here have installers that disregard where we want them installed and have popup readmes we don't want. Not only does it waste our time, but it also discourages downloads when the point is to
share your work.
Girafe is quite right.
Personally, I prefer the look of the installer, it says that the uploader has made the effort to present his or her work nicely.
As far as keeping plugins organised goes- what better way than with an installer? They create folders based on the upload (usually- I can't say I've seen many/any installers that install straight to the "Plugins" base folder). The installer also contains important information that may have been glossed over in the details, and the read me needs to be a pop-up, otherwise there is no real way of 'forcing' people to read it.
Freedom of Choice applies here, too. It is the uploader's choice to use an installer, there are ways of making things Mac-patible (No offence, but Macs account for how much of the total amount of Machines that people use SC4 on?) As far as I'm concerned, when you choose a minority Operating System, you have to accept the limitations, and to pay for ways to get around them.
I don't mean to start a flame war, especially not a PC Vs. Mac one.
What I'm trying to say is that the decisions about Installers are made by the individuals (maybe some teams enforce it, but that's up to the team then). I prefer the installer system to enhance the compression ratio and the aesthetically pleasing way they present the custom content.
Just my two cents,
Adrian.
And I understand and respect what you're saying. But I don't see the professionalism in an unnecessary EULA and an installer that only complicates the installation process for everyone. There are several problems with your statement.
Firstly, some installers will not keep the plugins folder organized the way you may want it. In fact, quite the contrary; those installers will only extract where they want to extract, not where you want. Almost everyone has no problem with ZIPs because you can mass extract them if you at least know where the Plugins folder is. If they don't, just point them to it. Also, forcing a popup readme only, would you look at that, wastes more time. Forcing people to read it won't necessarily work, because some people still complain about their brown boxes regardless. We also have to waste more time to close our browser. I mean, if you're going to have a popup readme, use a text file and open it in Notepad. If they don't want to read, I'm not obligated to provide support for them.
Secondly, the number of downloads for the Mac version of the NAM is, on the STEX, presently over 41,000. While that may not represent the number of unique downloaders, you can tell that there are at least 25,000 Mac users that use SC4, so now you have an idea of about how many Mac users there are, if not more. People have different reasons for using Macs. If Windows and Linux users don't have to pay anything to get SC4 plugins, why should Mac users have to pay for it? Because they're a minority? That's ridiculous.
Also, I, not being a member of any team and not being a very active uploader, do not care about how the installer looks. If I can get my plugins extracted as quickly as possible, I could not care less. In addition, compressing a ZIP with WinRAR on High would probably produce a smaller outcome, though I've yet to test it.
I agree with my team-mate Adrian.
Installers make things look professional and tidy, and if done properly, they will organise things by creator or team, which for me is a sensible way to organise the plugins. They might become an inconvenience to users who operate on an Apple/Mac system, but the majority of SC4 users are still on Windows.
They certainly do add an air of professionalism to a production, which is, I suspect, a major part of the reason that the BSC releases all their BATs/Lots/Mods in this format. It is one of the major reasons I choose to release them this way as well. The installer presents the basic information, can have a license agreement, makes it easy to access the readme, and makes provision for packages that have optional/alternative components.
I do disagree with the readme popping up automatically, (that can be a real nuisance) which is why on my installers I add a convenient button to open the readme, if the user wants/needs to read it.
If you organise your plugins by type, zoning, or other criteria, maybe Installers aren't for you... but you are possibly a perfectionist, and spend time putting things in specific locations, so is it really a major hassle?
I don't understand "The uploader is liable for any and all mistakes in installation." Could you please elaborate on that point?
If there are 41,000 Mac NAM downloads, perhaps you could share the matching statistic for the regular/Windows version? That would be a good way of presenting the facts. Proportions are more meaningful than raw numbers.
Quote from: joelyboy911 on December 02, 2010, 03:30:53 PM
I agree with my team-mate Adrian.
Installers make things look professional and tidy, and if done properly, they will organise things by creator or team, which for me is a sensible way to organise the plugins. They might become an inconvenience to users who operate on an Apple/Mac system, but the majority of SC4 users are still on Windows.
They certainly do add an air of professionalism to a production, which is, I suspect, a major part of the reason that the BSC releases all their BATs/Lots/Mods in this format. It is one of the major reasons I choose to release them this way as well. The installer presents the basic information, can have a license agreement, makes it easy to access the readme, and makes provision for packages that have optional/alternative components.
Again, I still don't see the professionalism if even a former ST mod agrees (http://www.simtropolis.com/forum/messageview.cfm?catid=22&threadid=118912&enterthread=y#1792207) that installers are a pain.
Quote
I do disagree with the readme popping up automatically, (that can be a real nuisance) which is why on my installers I add a convenient button to open the readme, if the user wants/needs to read it.
If you organise your plugins by type, zoning, or other criteria, maybe Installers aren't for you... but you are possibly a perfectionist, and spend time putting things in specific locations, so is it really a major hassle?
I don't understand "The uploader is liable for any and all mistakes in installation." Could you please elaborate on that point?
If the installer is prepared improperly, then the uploader is fully responsible. If the readme is incorrect, the uploader is responsible. If the uploader makes a typo and unzips to "Plugns" instead of "Plugins," the uploader is still responsible. Though that title is inaccurate and should be changed.
Quote
If there are 41,000 Mac NAM downloads, perhaps you could share the matching statistic for the regular/Windows version? That would be a good way of presenting the facts. Proportions are more meaningful than raw numbers.
665,000 Windows downloads. 17.2% of NAM downloads come from Mac users.
And anyways, what's the point of an EULA if the work is protected by international copyright laws? "Copyright (c) 2010 Author. All rights reserved." in the readme is sufficient, but to have an EULA adds a false sense of professionalism and power to something that's regarded as worthless to everyone outside of the SC4 community.
QuoteIt wastes everyone's time. Not only does the downloader have to waste time accepting a common-sense EULA and post-Vista users having to grant security privileges, but the uploader has to waste their time making the installer when it could simply be zipped up.
If you feel that clicking through an installer, which will take about ten seconds at most, is a waste of time, the creators of custom content might considering that preparing and uploading their work could be a waste of time, too, and simply don't do it anymore.
QuoteIncompatibility for Mac. Also going back to wasting time, the uploader has to make a Mac-compatible ZIP (which you could just use for Windows as well), or force them to use FileJuicer. FileJuicer is not free, and those who can't pay for it (for example me, only being 13) get left in the dark once the trial expires.
While FileJuicer is not free, buying a license for just 12,95 EUR doesn't look like a fortune for me. Using a Mac has always been a bit more expensive than buying a PC, so I'd assume this small amount of money is well-spent, considering you only have to do it once. If you can't buy it yourself, ask your parents, or a friend.
QuotePotential for inflation. To store the EULA, interface, and the files could possibly (but not always) cause the filesize to inflate, going against one of the points of using an installer.
The installer is compressing the files in a similar manner than with a ZIP file. I've just looked at one of my files, and the size of the EXE is exactly the same as the ZIPped files. The EULA is just a few lines of text, an the "footprint" of the installer program is a few KB at most. The compression algorithm might be better than ZIP as well. Just have a look at the NAM download - the NSIS installer compresses about 30% better than ZIP.
QuoteAntivirus software/post-Vista. Users using McAfee may have to deal with their antivirus asking if the user wants to execute this file, may refuse to run the file, or may not download it in the first place if it has a web filter.
The installers don't contain any viruses. Just because it's an EXE file, it's not more prone to viruses than a ZIP file. It's not our fault that some antivirus programs treat EXE files as potential viruses, though.
QuoteThe uploader is liable for any and all mistakes in installation.
What do you mean with that? All downloads are provided "as is", this means they are working fine on our system, but nobody can guarantee that they will do the same on your computer. The risk of installing a download in an improper way is far higher when offering a ZIP file than using an installer, which will suggest a default installation path, and make sure that potential loading order issues are avoided.
QuoteUser loses ability to organize their plugins folder efficiently. The installer is, instead, going to unzip where it feels like. In some cases, the user could specify a directory, but that's just a lot more time wasted.
In pretty much all cases, the default installation path can be changed. It might take a bit more time to do that in the installer interface, but if you don't want that, simply use the default path and rearrange your files later. With a ZIP file, you also need to create or select a folder of your choice, so there isn't really that much time that is wasted.
QuoteThe readmes that pop up in your web browser without your permission. Seriously? I know what I downloaded, I know what the dependencies are. It would make life easier if these were just listed in the description.
The readme is there for a reason - you're supposed to read it. It takes a good amount of time to compile those, and they contain essential information about the download, such as dependency links, potential compatibility problems etc. Modern browsers make use of tabs, so even if you install a large amount of downloads at the same time, you don't get multiple windows. Hint: If you make your browser window smaller, and don't overlap it with your explorer window, you don't have to switch back and forth all the time.
If you really think that downloading our work is wasting too much of your precious time, then please skip our downloads entirely. We spent dozens, if not hundreds of hours for our creation, and we spend additional hours to prepare and upload our work - and everything for free. Some of the issues described above can be avoided if you donate some money and get the LEX (or STEX) CDs/DVDs, which usually have an interface to install several files at once, or other helpful tools. I can only speak for the SFBT downloads, but so far, I never heard of any problems regarding the installation process - every single installer is using the very same principle, the same base path, and the same readme format. It's easy to memorize, skips some of the steps mentioned above (such as the EULA thingy), so everyone should be able to handle it without any problems.
Quote from: Andreas on December 02, 2010, 03:40:46 PM
If you feel that clicking through an installer, which will take about ten seconds at most, is a waste of time, the creators of custom content might considering that preparing and uploading their work could be a waste of time, too, and simply don't do it anymore.
While FileJuicer is not free, buying a license for just 12,95 EUR doesn't look like a fortune for me. Using a Mac has always been a bit more expensive than buying a PC, so I'd assume this small amount of money is well-spent, considering you only have to do it once. If you can't buy it yourself, ask your parents, or a friend.
In pretty much all cases, the default installation path can be changed. It might take a bit more time to do that in the installer interface, but if you don't want that, simply use the default path and rearrange your files later. With a ZIP file, you also need to create or select a folder of your choice, so there isn't really that much time that is wasted.
The readme is there for a reason - you're supposed to read it. It takes a good amount of time to compile those, and they contain essential information about the download, such as dependency links, potential compatibility problems etc. Modern browsers make use of tabs, so even if you install a large amount of downloads at the same time, you don't get multiple windows. Hint: If you make your browser window smaller, and don't overlap it with your explorer window, you don't have to switch back and forth all the time.
If you really think that downloading our work is wasting too much of your precious time, then please skip our downloads entirely. We spent dozens, if not hundreds of hours for our creation, and we spend additional hours to prepare and upload our work - and everything for free. Some of the issues described above can be avoided if you donate some money and get the LEX (or STEX) CDs/DVDs, which usually have an interface to install several files at once, or other helpful tools. I can only speak for the SFBT downloads, but so far, I never heard of any problems regarding the installation process - every single installer is using the very same principle, the same base path, and the same readme format. It's easy to memorize, skips some of the steps mentioned above (such as the EULA thingy), so everyone should be able to handle it without any problems.
Quote
Well, speaking only as a BATter who caught on, there are several tools around that can take the various pieces of a BATted lot and make them into a consolidated .dat file. This should be done for all such lots, and if there is chaff you want to include in your download, then let me decide if I want it in my plugins folder. If you are good enough to BAT you can at least use the Files2dat.exe program to reduce any chance of error on the part of a novice user.
Constructing an installer using questionalble software that does not run on some users' machines is a nuisance, and makes for wasted effort all around. Big chunks of documentation and pictures, etc. and especially BAT production intermediate .sav files do not belong in the plugins folder. It is not true that the loader skips them. It has to at least look at either the file name or the header to see if it should load the file. A waste of computer cycles for people with big plugin suites.
Now, as to so-called protection of intellectual property, why not just put a copyright notice somewhere in the material. That is sufficient for most legal systems, and you then don't have to monkey around pretending to be a Microsoft-type outfit trying to protect something that is essentially garbage to most people. A clear installation instruction if there is anything other than "Put the .dat file into your plugins structure" is the only thing needed. The copyright notice can simply be in a text or html file that accompanies the download. Most countries are members of the international copyright union, so a notice that says:
Copyright © yyyy by insert creator's name here. All rights reserved.
Is sufficient protection. Otherwise playing corporation is a waste of time.
However, let me exempt from this rant, all large plugin systems like the NAM that include many options and an installer that correctly chooses them. If you want a documentation folder installed with your product, it should go in documents/SimCity 4/Documentation and not in Plugins. It isn't much of a job to switch directories, now, is it? As I recall, it is about three lines of code, maybe even less.
Quote
Firstly EULAs, even those from commercial companies, are rarely valid in any jurisdiction other than the Corporate States of America. Copyright exists as soon as you create something - it doesn't even have to be claimed, just proved if you wish to enforce your rights.
EULAs really are completely pretentious - especially in the SC4 custom content context. And don't get me started on uninvited pop-ups and images I don't need saved in a folder on my machine ...
Just use a bog standard zip file unless you have a multitude of options to offer, as with NAM.
Quote
This is the reason why i didn't download CAM again when I restarted my plugins... I had to run hundreds of installers for buildings when if they were zipped; I would have just used winrar to unzip all at once. So much extra work for unnecessary things.
Quote
All that unnecessary clicking and post install file moving is annoying since the creator usually doesn't know the structure of my plugins folder! It's especially annoying when you download a batch of uploads... trying to install 20 files with installers in one go gives me serious finger ache!
EULA's/TOS just seem a bit pretentious to me. There's no real need... especially if what simmaster07 says is true! It would be ok if they had any re-sale value, but SC4 models are pretty useless in the grand scheme of things. We have a pretty good community for protecting against plagiarism... just look at the STEX! Plagiarists are set up on within minutes! Each to their own though.
Quote
I recently downloaded some stuff that came with installers - BATs, lots, and texture/prop packs. While I appreciate the effort involved, it's slightly maddening - I can organize my own plugins folder just fine and dandy, thank you. No need for an installer to insist where it goes...
Quote
I dont think ive ever agreed with a post more. I hate installers, I have both McAffee and Windows 7 to shut up. Whats wrong with just dumping it in plugins? If it needs a specific place, just tell us in the readme. Then its our fault if it goes wrong.
I'm positive that there are many other people who have many other reasons for disliking installers. Unfortunately, their often our only choice and we have to install everything one-by-one when the uploaders could just include the readme in the description and use DATs and ZIPs. You said you spend more hours to package the installer, but why? Wouldn't it be easier to ZIP it up? Again, I see no professionalism in the fact that we spend lots more time having to use installers than mass extracting with something like WinRAR or with the built-in feature in Windows Explorer.
I think you're missing the point.
If you don't like it, don't download it.
If you want the BAT/Lot/Mod/Whatever, you'll have to put up with how the Uploader has packaged it. Threads like this do little to change people's minds, you've probably only made me more stubborn about putting things in Installers. ::)
And yes, being in the minority user group does mean you need to buy Filejuicer to use everything properly. Once again, it's your choice. Your choice to buy a Mac, our choice to use installers. It is not ridiculous.
Have you tried getting a Virtual PC for Mac? You could just install XP on there, use it to install the plugins, then transfer them across. It's available here (http://www.microsoft.com/australia/office/mac/virtualpc7/default.aspx). I use a Virtual PC to run SC4 Mapper, as it does not run on Vista/Window 7 (as far as I know).
Adrian.
I think the point that will come out of this discussion, is that it's the creator's prerogative to package the goods however they like. As a downloader, you can take it or leave it.
Quote from: simmaster07 on December 02, 2010, 03:36:07 PM
If the installer is prepared improperly, then the uploader is fully responsible. If the readme is incorrect, the uploader is responsible. If the uploader makes a typo and unzips to "Plugns" instead of "Plugins," the uploader is still responsible. Though that title is inaccurate and should be changed.
That is why, on many of the SC4 Content Exchanges (LEX, PLEX, CSG-X, etc), there are checks and balances in place to ensure that properly prepared materials are uploaded. And if such a mistake was found in the final version, of course the uploader would fix it. A creator is just as likely to make an error with the actual SC4 files as with the installer, and would have to be a fool to upload them without checking. I don't think this is a valid point against installers in general.
We (I think I can speak as a creator) don't include readmes and information because we think you (as downloaders) are stupid, it's to help make sure everything runs smoothly. As creators we make what we think is best. If you disagree please don't download.
Quote from: simmaster07 on December 02, 2010, 03:58:22 PM
I'm positive that there are many other people who have many other reasons for disliking installers. Unfortunately, their often our only choice and we have to install everything one-by-one when the uploaders could just include the readme in the description and use DATs and ZIPs. You said you spend more hours to package the installer, but why? Wouldn't it be easier to ZIP it up? Again, I see no professionalism in the fact that we spend lots more time having to use installers than mass extracting with something like WinRAR or with the built-in feature in Windows Explorer.
Creating the atual installer doesn't take long, with the Clickteam installer, you can do that in less than a minute. I chose the usage of installers simply because the logistics is much easier for me - there are no support issues where to install the files, there's rarely a file conflict, or anyone complaining that they can't find outdated files (in case an updated version is released). Do you really know how large the percentage of
skilled users is among the SC4 players? I'm using installers to avoid potential support issues, and so far, there rarely were any, which makes me think it's the right thing I'm doing. :)
It's a long time since I did much installing (other than SC files nowadays), but I seem to remember that at least Microsoft had the option of a silent install -- and since I anyway (almost) never change the default values (at least when I know who I'm dealing with), wouldn't it be possible to make a batch script with an /s switch to do the nine clicks it takes to install an object (or 945 clicks to install 105 objects).
@ Simmaster07
Ah – a challenge. I like challenges.
Here is my jmyers2043 commercial office download. I have a laptop at my right hand with an online stop watch ready to time how long it takes to download and install these files. What I hope to do is to start the stop watch then click download and see how long it takes.
Time is running so I'll click the download button.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi148.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fs26%2Fjmyers2043%2Fimg2437.jpg&hash=e18810b09736deef0d8f8dcd43565a1dfaf99374)
I've not downloaded any files for the past two years to save it to my HD. I simply click 'Open'
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi148.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fs26%2Fjmyers2043%2Fimg2438.jpg&hash=7570ddd2100446f967485dc9b582677a7a0f143e)
The file downloads to a temp file on my computer and the PKZip window opens automatically. I click to execute the exe file.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi148.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fs26%2Fjmyers2043%2Fimg2439.jpg&hash=ad212c55f37196c6b6fc1b85312520104b218e16)
The installer screen opens and I have to click the 'next' button twice before I can click the 'start button'. Right now I'm up to six mouse clicks.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi148.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fs26%2Fjmyers2043%2Fimg2441.jpg&hash=a28f56121de11d225ed6893f400a4f1b21cb2ad5)
The files are deployed to Plugins\BSC\Jmyers\ and I would be done at this point but I see there is an optional readme file. I assume that most people wish to see if there are any dependencies that need downloaded. Plus most BSC readme's detail the file deployment paths for those who have special organizational skills. So I'll click one last time to read the readme.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi148.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fs26%2Fjmyers2043%2Fimg2442.jpg&hash=e2922194485d3fee10abb6b9b7e43eb3252ea176)
The readme opens. Time to click 'stop' button of that online stop watch. Presto! The process took 22 seconds. The files are safe and sound. These commerical offices will function properly in the game.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi148.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fs26%2Fjmyers2043%2Fimg2443.jpg&hash=8db927d9383edd57b2481ca37bc3c4d5ca00622f)
Now, I don't know about you but I am hard pressed to agree that installers take a lot of time. And I'm a monkey's uncle if you can go through the process faster because I've already beaten you. You have to click on my documents, then SimCity4, then Plugins, then some special folder you have or will have to create before you can drag and drop the four commercial office files.
What am I saying? These files are free. You didn't pay one cent for them. Those of us who created them and uploaded them earn no money from them. SimCity is supposed to be something one does to pass the time and be entertained. But apparently you're all stressed out about it. And if the worst thing that you can say is that you have to do a few extra mouse clicks to move files where you want them ... then what I have to say is ... people like you burn me up and I wish that you'd go to some other web site and take your attitude with you.
- Jim
I recall the stink over at ST when BSC first started using Installers. This and the dependency argument is something that keeps coming around year after year.
When we first started using them, we were going through an explosion in custom content and there was a lot of noise about where all this custom content was and version control. We had a lot of internal conversations about how best to help the general community (and ourselves given that we knew we'd be maintaining our content and would invariably be releasing updates) and decided to try to establish a standard Plugins structure to make management easier. The best way to implement this was through an installer. Implemented correctly it would suggest where to put content (and update it later on) but not force the end-user into that structure. All the installer-based downloads I've used of late still let you decide where to put stuff, and I've had to re-arrange a lot of stuff based on the DVD structure.
The readme's were also in response to the wide range of technical skills of the general SC community. There was a lot of noise about what dependencies were needed, what the lots behaved like etc. when many uploaders were just including their lot and model files in a zip. Some folks were using text-based readme's (including myself) but human nature being what it is, often people didn't read them and then flooded the forums with questions covered in the readme's. So we moved to HTML-based readme's and set the installer to automatically display it at the end. As Andreas' mentions, it's not biggie if you don't want to read it, but we were just trying to encourage people through the path of least resistance to have a quick read.
For a while we were releasing lots in both forms; installer-based and zipped (the Amsterdam Centraal Station comes to mind) but it's too much overhead for the creator. We chose to go down the path that helps the greatest number of end-users.
As to Mac vs. PC, that argument will never die. I'm guessing the proportion of SC4 Mac users has grown significantly over the past few years.
This is one of those "can't please all of the people all of the time" situations. Personally I believe use of installers has more pro's than con's.
People that post things like this really make me angry sometimes... Creators spend hours upon hours of their free time to make these things for us to download and use for FREE, and they want to complain about something as simple as an installer? seriously, get over it, or dont download them
Ah the sound of a healthy debate... with a few bumps here and there like a repaved road, but I digress.
Well, from my view, I could care less if an installer is used or not. Of course, it's nice if its something like the NAM, but otherwise, it makes little to no difference to me. Sure, it does get annoying after a while when you're doing a mass install and your browser is filled with readme's that you don't want to read while you're trying to browse the web at the same time (in my case, I rarely ever need to anymore, seeing as I haven't downloaded any dependency in at least 2 months now, since I have a major base established, and I normally use the links provided in the description if there's one I don't have. And of course I usually get all the info I need for my purposes from the download description), but one can simply (on most newer browsers) mass close tabs with a few clicks.
Installers do look more professional, I will say that (though those who tend to fly through the installer or are more of a function-over-looks person won't care as much), and if you're not big on organizing your plugins folder into Mods, BATs, etc folders, they usually do a good job. Now if you are an organizer, then I can see how installers would get annoying. But that's the price to pay for cleanliness. After all, where is a dusted counter without the sneezing and coughing? :D
That's all I can really add right now.
(Sidenote, is it just me or do I like to use parentheses...)
@ Simmaster07, I can assure that using installers saves the creator time in troubleshooting issues post download.
I cannot tell you how often I receive PMs for my plain old 'zipped' files over on ST (which do have a read-me) about dependencies, brown boxes etc etc etc.
On this site, where I use installers, I do not field such questions because the installer simply puts all the files where they are needed.
Clearly, given the amount of troubleshooting PMs that I field on ST which end in my asking "have you unzipped the model file into your plugins?" not every user has done that, nor is every user capable of following your method.
Given the amount of my time I have spent creating the model files for you to use, the amount of my time I have taken to make the lot files for you to use, the amount of my time I have taken to test that grow/plops/other all behave as expected, the amount of my time I take to list dependencies in a read-me and the amount of time taken by scruitineers to ensure uploads on this site are also of high quality, again all for you to use for free, I think that as the creator of these free files, I deserve a break in fielding end user errors, wouldn't you agree?
You say you are only 13, so I will cut you some slack for the blinkers you are obviously wearing in purporting your stance. However I will re-iterate, it's not your time, but mine.
I should start by saying that by 'complaining' about installers people aren't saying that that means the download is not worth downloading. If some people find installers tiresome and annoying as opposed to other methods, then surely they have the right, in a polite society, to put their reasons to the community... even if it is ultimately always going to be in vain. I don't think that telling them to go away and shouting them down is the right way to get them to listen to your rebuffs.
Personally, I too prefer simple zipped folders. I have my own system for organising my plugins, and I have a plugin folder shortcut on my desktop so I can simply drag a folder/file from the zip straight into my plugin folder or one of the categorical sub folders I have... minimal clicks. When I have installers that adds a few more steps into that process, in that I have to go through the installer's rigmarole and install to a new folder on the desktop, then move the files manually to where I want them and hunt out the other documents if they were sent to a different place. I always read the readme's but I don't tend to keep them once I've read them and got the content working. I began this paragraph with the word 'personally', and this is my personal experience of installers. If you ask me for a straight answer I'll say that I don't like them and would prefer not to have them. I'm not arrogant enough to claim that my methods are correct, the best or most common, but they do mean that Installers and I clash slightly.
However, the content is nearly always worth this minor annoyance, and I'd never have complained about it... but then I saw this thread and another and realised I wasn't alone. I'm not expecting anyone to change their methods... SC4 communities of all stripes have a tendency for stubbornness in my experience... just hear it, don't belittle us, politely disagree and once it dies down, carry on as before. Happy days!
To qualify the value of my opinion; I am a creator of custom content, a modest one I'll admit, but a creator nonetheless. To date I've not received a single PM or comment regarding the difficulty of finding the plugins folder. When that first PM or comment comes I'll answer it with no qualms. I try to keep my descriptions and readme's as clear and comprehensive as possible, and so far it's worked for me. If someone who's very new to the game still needs help after that, then I'm happy to oblige. We should all be willing to help newcomers... it's just the friendly thing to do. When a dependency link gets broken it still has to be updated, whether you use installers or plain old zip files. So long as you keep info accurate and up do date a creator shouldn't be getting any PMs about finding dependencies! I guess I might expect some mischievous spam to hit my PM box following this :D
It's worth also noting that the 'installer annoyance' (meant subjectively, not as a sweeping definition) only really applies when I'm installing a batch of files in one sitting. Then the extra clicks can get quite tedious. Single installs don't cause any real issue for me. I just put up with it and keep quiet.
My opinion of the 'professional appearance' of installers is just that. They appear more professional than zipped folders. In my opinion they aren't. Theoretically you could pack up any old junk into an installer (which, as has been said, is easy and quick to do), and to some that would make it look more professional and give it more perceived value. You can put lipstick on a pig... but it's still a pig! Conversely, a great upload doesn't need an installer to make it complete. Some of the very best and most respected stuff across the whole community, doesn't come in installers. Equally, some more of the very best and most respected stuff does! It doesn't really matter in the end... but we can at least talk about it calmly and civilly, and not take our different opinions as personal attacks. Can't we?
I don't want to post all this without adding that I completely appreciate everyone's hard work, especially since I know from personal experience how much work goes in to creating stuff for this game. My opinion of delivery methods just differs... that's all!
Thanks for the detailed and level-headed reply, psander5. :) I certainly respect other people's opinions, and I can understand very well that some of them consider it as quite a nuisance to click through those installers, instead just right-click a ZIP file and select "Extract", esp. if you want to install more than a handful of downloads at a time. Just recently, I did a mass download after not downloading anything for several months, and I think I was clicking through about one hundred installers at least. Admittedly, that was pretty tiresome, but then again, it also had its advantages.
As I mentioned above, I made my browser and the explorer window smaller, so I didn't have to switch back and forth all the time, and when I was done with installing everything, I went through the opened readme files in the tabs, one by one, checking the dependency links, and installed those that I didn't have so far. I found this rather comfortable compared to manually going through all new folders and open the readme file manually, but naturally, everyone has different preferences - unfortunately, there isn't really a method to please everyone.
My plugins folder is structured by the name of the creators, this makes it easier for me to find something, since I know very well who made a certain BAT or lot in most cases. Other people might have different methods of organizing their files, and I agree that for some playing styles, ordering folders by type is far better. But even though you use the default installation path and have to arrange your files manually after going through the installers, I think this step doesn't take that much extra time after all. You know exactly where to look, and just drag the individual subfolders to the proper place. I'm not sure how this would be done faster when extracting from a ZIP file; somehow, you must move the source files into your folder structure as the first step.
The following is rather speculative, but it's really something you wouldn't find out anyway: While it might be true that the number of support issues isn't higher when using ZIP files rather than installers, you never know when the potential user is giving up trying to install your files. Novice users might know installers, but can't handle ZIP files, or the other way round (the latest Windows versions display ZIP files as folders by default, so at least they would see the EXE immediately, and it would be just a double-click away). Who knows if they are able to send you a PM if they have a problem, maybe they would just delete your file and try something different. From all the registered users here or at Simtropolis, only a minor fraction is active in the forum discussions, and apart from dead user accounts, most of them probably just signed up in order to being able to download files.
So after all, it's just a matter of taste, and I think while it's certainly legit to express your personal opinion, it's somewhat moot to complain about this, and ask (or even demand) others to change their preferred method. Both methods have their advantages and disadvantages, and I hope I was able to smooth out some of the arguments that were mentioned in the first posting. As for the "professional" look, that's merely cosmetics after all, but I'd say it looks rather neat to have an installer with the team logo, and a nice splash screen. It's an extra effort that I do for each SFBT upload, because I feel that a nice BAT or lot that took many hours to create should be presented in an appropriate way.
Personally I find installers alright, however I really do not like that they don't work on Mac but I think that's more of a problem on the Mac side than the SC4 side. Also installers were designed for programs and applications, and now if I have 2 pieces of software that do the same job and only one is an installer, I'll choose the one without an installer, because it's simpler.
However plugins are slightly different, and ideally they should be built into the game so that it's just download and activate. So installer fits with the plugin system better.
However personally I'd prefer some direct from the website "installer", so that its cross platform less time wasted and smoother installation.
I would like to thank all those who so willingly share their creations. I do not pause to think about how the creator chooses to share her/his custom content... I am so thankful that the 'Creators' are willing to share their time and effort.
For me it is magic... that I can customize... because there are so many people, from all walks of life, that contribute their TIME, art, knowledge, skills, professions and best of all the desire to share.. for free! &apls :thumbsup:
Only bad things happen fast... good things take time.. time to install correctly, exe... zip... dependency... essential read mes, who am I to complain?! ()what()
At this time $%Grinno$% I do not have the time, patience, knowledge, or skill to modify MY game in the manner that awesome CUSTOM content contributors have allowed me to explore... from the mountain to the the desert, from the farm to metropolis.... dirt tracks to multi lane highways... earth to mars... and if you can't find what you are looking for... more than one person is willing to help! &hlp
I truly do not understand why anyone would dare ask for more than what is so freely shared!...
Howdy, speaking from the perspective of someone who hasn't created or uploaded any custom content, either works for me. I just recently, within the past couple of months, started to play SimCity4 again. I bought it several years ago and installed it on my laptop. It didn't run well, so I uninstalled it and put it on the shelf to gather dust.
One evening, I was sitting in my office bored, and the box set of Simcity4 just happen to catch my eye and I thought to give it another chance (I have better laptops now). I installed it again and started playing (and yes, it runs alot better now). I was having creative issues and decided to look online for some tips, possibly a website that could help. Google > SimCity4 > welcome to the world of custom content !!! &dance I had absolutely no idea this was out there. Now, after 4GBs of downloads and hours/days/weeks of installing, organising, researching, deleting, beating my head against the wall and almost throwing my laptop across the room on several occasions, I felt compelled to throw in my 2 cents, tho a few weeks late.
I do really like the plugins with installers. I started from scratch a couple of months ago building and organising my plugin files. For the first few hundred, I just dragged and dropped, or used the default install path. In my anxiousness to check all the new custom stuff, I didn't fully read the HTMLs and soon discovered lil brown boxes all over the place. I realized what "dependencies" were for at that point lol.
Anyway, I've gone through several different ways to set up and organize my folders and I found that using the installers default path and system was the simplest and one of the best ways to avoid loading something in more than one folder. Its not perfect, but its a great base to start with.
I'm not going to quibble over whether the custom content creators should use an installer or just zip it up. For me, if you guys are willing to spend the time to create and debug the content, I can spend the time needed to load it.
Finally, I just wanted to say thank you to everyone that has put forth their time and effort to enhance this game, you guys are awesome.
Thanks,
Joe
The most annoying thing about installers to me is that they all seem to want elevation for no reason at all, since plugins should be installed in the user's profile in the normal case. Of course once you've entered an admin user's password you find that it tries to install into the admin's profile. So you have to navigate all the way from the Computer root to find your own Plugins folder. That's a lot of unnecessary clicks. Then some of the crappier plugins not only force open their README, but they open it in IE rather than your default browser. What's that all about?
Most of this is presumably down to the crap installer program most uploaders seem to use, but I would hope they could find a less obviously broken alternative.