🚀 go-pugleaf

    Again, see inline:

> The point here is that ClickOnce is not an installation technology. An
> installation technology makes changes to the system at a fairly mid to
> low level. Microsoft's ClickOnce page itself declares that for these
> types of changes, Windows Installer needs to be used.

    Again, ClickOnce is an installation technology.  Why you don't see it 
like that, I don't know, but the fact is that it does perform an install on 
the user's local machine.

    We seem to be in agreement about the fact it is limited.  I never 
implied that ClickOnce could do everything, but that there were overlaps in 
what you are offering and what ClickOnce offers.

> For instance, with ClickOnce, you could not install a system tray
> application that runs every time the system starts. That's the type of
> "low level" I mean, not even stuff like drivers that the Microsoft
> documentation refers to. And I think everybody will agree an
> installation technology needs to be able to do at least that!

    We are in disagreement here about what an installation technology needs 
to do.  I agree, that for more intricate installs, products such as yours 
(and WISE's installer, as well as InstallShield's product, to name a few) 
are the way to go.

    However, your original post didn't bother to point out those details, 
rather, they focused on the details which I felt were overlapping with what 
ClickOnce offers.

> I have already based my response on research that includes this
> article. What I am saying above is that you are not free to decide what
> goes where. For instance, you cannot create a shortcut in the Startup
> group. This is what I mean by "freely". Again, pretty limiting as far
> as installations go themselves.

    We agreed on this.

> Sure you can make cosmetic changes, but see my replies above for the
> kinds of non-trivial limitations I am talking about.

    Again, we agreed on this as well.

> The bootstrap is very limited as I have described in the original press
> release, and my original reply to you above. InstallAware is both a
> real installation tool, and it also addresses the limitations in the
> bootstrapper.

    Actually, you make no mention of the bootstrapper option in your 
original post which I consider to be what you refer to as your "press 
release".  If there is another one, then I don't know about it.

> Lets say some simple COM dependency then.

    True enough.

> Where do you get the idea that your original compiled assemblies are
> changed? If you look at the InstallAware website:
>
> http://www.installaware.com/web-deployment-superior-compression.htm
>
> This page clearly explains how InstallAware achieves its compression
> magic. We're not reverse engineering or decompiling anything. We are
> very cleanly and inobtrusively removing compressed data streams,
> replacing them with identical data in decompressed form, and then
> compressing them with a superior algorithm. Otherwise the system would
> fail anyways, because Windows Installer is very picky about this kind
> of stuff. If a file inside a cabinet even changes position, things
> break.

    Fair enough.  I failed to look into that and made a guess as to how it 
was done.  That was an error on my part.

> Please point out which of the following assertions are incorrect:
>
> 1) That InstallAware is an installation technology which performs
> install tasks that cannot be performed with ClickOnce, even simple
> things like system tray autorun applications, shortcuts in system
> folders, etc.
> 2) That InstallAware compresses the .NET Framework to up to 1/3rd its
> original size - available nowhere else.
> 3) That InstallAware features a smarter bootstrap mechanism, which
> gives the developer complete freedom in choosing which runtimes go
> where, and which are bundled with the main setup.exe file - again,
> available nowhere else. All of the above are factually correct. May I 
> kindly suggest you
> investigate InstallAware in a little more detail before doing what
> looks like slamming it, or claiming that we are making inaccurate
> statements for people's money.

    If you feel I am slamming it, I am sorry, but I asked a question which 
involved a comparison with another technology (which in your initial post, 
made your product look similar to that technology).  You responded to that, 
and I responded to that in turn, pointing out information which I feel was 
omitted.

> Both your posts so far are basically
> saying we are charging for something people get for free with Visual
> Studio out of the box, and this is factually false.

    I never said that you were charging for something that people get for 
free out of the box.  Rather, I asked for you to indicate how your product 
differed from the product that is offered out of the box.

> InstallAware is unique with its partial web deployment, superior
> compression, and stellar support for Windows Installer. This is why
> people are paying us for InstallAware. It is also unique in that it has
> delivered support for .NET 2.0 before any other Windows Installer
> vendor. This is something I would expect you to appreciate, instead of
> bash.

    Again, I never bashed it.  I asked questions.  If you have a problem 
with responses to statements you make, you really shouldn't be posting here. 
If you think that the questions I asked and my responses were bad, you 
should see some of the other discussions in this, and other groups.

> Of course, I think your post has helped clarify the differences between
> ClickOnce and real installers, so I thank you here for that. I also
> understand that you are trying to act in the best interests of the .NET
> community here, protecting users from ill willed vendors, which is
> something I am sure the whole community appreciates. I just hope you
> had exercised due diligence before making your accusations about
> InstallAware.

    Again, where are the accusations?  I asked questions and made 
statements, just as you did.  Where I was wrong, I openly admitted it.

> You may have felt a certain way but it is your
> responsibility, again, to the entire .NET community, to hold your
> feelings in check until you can back them with facts.

    I am sorry that you felt I didn't back what I said with facts.  With the 
exceptions where I admitted where I was wrong (and I believe there is only 
one place), nothing about what I said was incorrect.  There are areas where 
we are in agreement.  I just felt that the highlights of your initial press 
release overlapped areas of functionality that ClickOnce offers.  I never 
said it didn't do anything else that you proclaim it does, rather, I asked 
what the difference was.


-- 
          - Nicholas Paldino [.NET/C# MVP]
          - mvp@spam.guard.caspershouse.com

>
> Sincerely,
> Sinan Karaca
>
>>
>> --
>>           - Nicholas Paldino [.NET/C# MVP]
>>           - mvp@spam.guard.caspershouse.com
>