There is absolutly no reason what-so-ever to use installer files for your plugins that do anything more than put a .dll and a .pdf in a directory.

Give me a nice little .dll and a nice little .pdf and I'm happy

Putting shit in my Add/Remove Programs panel, registry etc - no good.

Please keep it in mind that all your really need is a .zip file.

If you take a look at the MDA Piano and MDA ePiano for instance, they come with installers - but all they do is extract a .dll. This is perfect because it gives them the "Professional" way of extracting the program but doesn't leave all this crap everywhere. reFX just .zip's 'em. That's also perfect. I'm sure most of the guys on KvR will agree with me here. Look at the fiasco going on with !j Development right now because of this crap.

Anyone agree with me? Disagree?

I agree. I'd much rather just place the .dll in the correct folder myself, rather than have god knows what written to other locations on my system.

I guess that sometimes there might be a need for an installer - like when the vsti requires subfolders containing skins, presets, wavetables and stuff like that, (Pentagon I and z3ta for example), but too often after running the installer you find that all it's done is place the .dll in your plugins folder. In these cases I don't really see the point. Surely everyone knows where to place the plugin file manually?

I agree completely. Just the .dll and manual in a zip file... I'd be a happy camper.

I agree, half the time with the installers I wind up placing the .dll in a directory (sometimes even drive) I didn't want it in, then find myself either uninstalling then reinstalling, or I'll have to do some folder moving, just to avoid from clutter. If a plug needs more than just it's .dll to run I've got no problem with them. If you'll be selling your plug-in in stores via retail outlets than you need the installer, other than that it's usually just a bit extrenuous.

Best thing was that Jason Ninja Synth - it came in some weird modern M$ installer format (don't even remember the fileending) and I had to download quite some unnnecessary shit from Billyboy's website in order to even start that installer - sheer madness!

So, gimme a zip with ReadMe's, PDFs and DLLs and I'm all fine!

Sascha

Well, I have no problem with a little key going in my registry if I registered the plugin.

And as for registering a plugin from your start menu? Nothing is worst! - it's just more crap cluttering up your menus and folders and everything else! IMO It's a way delevopers try and get users to remember they are using unregistered plugins. Like a static burst or limited functions isn't enough? If those types of things aren't bothering you - it's because your not using the damn thing.

I see the to have an installer for commercial instruments but free instruments shouldn't have the hassle since your not registering them,

CoreTrooper quoth I see the to have an installer for commercial instruments but free instruments shouldn't have the hassle since your not registering them

its not a question of whether they're free or not, but what else they need to install. Like help files, for example. Remember that some people who are less experienced might want a comparitive-to-everything-else-they-run-in-Windows uninstall option rather than having to hunt down a .dll and some extra files...

I finally installed the copy of ninja synth I downloaded today and I can understand why this thread started now.That was alot of BS for a free plug-in.But I did like some of the sounds after all was said and done and in the end I never pass up a free meal

speaking of free meals I finally installed some of the cockaigne plug-ins Tasty.

id rather not have all the installer crap to be honest [unless its ABSOLUTELY necessary] ...

... i like the fxpansion line on this ... they just zip up the .dll and other bits and let you put em where you like ... i also like the fact that this is explained and justified on their website / readme file ...

... cheers rob

"banana without the bowl"

We cannot speak for others, but we can speak for us:
Perhaps some arguments will take you nearer to the topic:

1. This has todo with the workflow.
The MSI Installer plugges into the Microsoft C++ Development Studio.
So it is only "one step" to compile this setup package. ( There are also other Installer systems, that plug into the Development Studios. The times, where you had to do this from the scratch are over, thanks god!)
2. MSI files i.e. are very "little" and fast shipped over the internet. This format is the new officially supportred standard by Microsoft.
Also it gives you a very good "Rollback Mechanism" without needing any Cleaners after install. It removes all files and! registry entries completely.

3. Some users may need the documentations, because our and other synthesizers are not even simple to program.
4. You have to accept the conditons and terms of the license first, before you install software.
5. We have i.e. prepared a demo song. most people like to see the synths in action after install only with clicking on an icon.
6. Not all users are advanced users. We have to make sure, that our amount of support time is as minimal as possible for this freeware. Therefore a complete installation package, including all files with user friendly access.
7. The shipping of a single *.dll arround the world by other people like the developer itself, is not allowed without permission!
8. A really big problem is the "version checking" of delivered software (espessilally with system files). This is only possible with installer systems.
9. Future projects cannot be delivered in a simple zip file anymore. These will need some registry entries and alot of additional system files.
10. Even audiowarez will be "delivered" by its own installers in the meantime! LOL.
11. This is only a raw overview of statements (goes not into the deep) and can be continued...

We hope, this helps to understand.
!j development

!j development wrote:

We hope, this helps to understand.

Not exactly. I can't see the need for all that "advanced" stuff as even the most complexed softsynths in the end are just a DLL.

I wouldn't even worry about the "installer no/yes" thing too much if it wasn't about backing up/transporting things.
I usually just backup my "Vstplugins folder" which includes everything (manuals as well). Then, when moving them to a new/other machine I only need to copy the folder - no need to look for installers at all. Sure, most commercial plugins will ask for a CD and/or registration numbers, but I have all those in some "most important" CD bag and just insert them whenever I call up the plugin for the first time.
I seriously don't want to search for CDs for each and every little freebie plugin. And of course I don't - even Ninja backs up fine with just the DLL, no need for that MSI stuff - which IMO is crap, kinda like hunting doves with cannons. Might be useful for *some* things that require more than a DLL and a manual, but VST synths just don't.

Regards,
Sascha

Just in defence of installers in general - we've always been firmly in the "zipped up DLL" camp at Muon, but there's always one snag that gets the newbies every single time. Windows, as a default, hides DLL files! This causes our single most frequent technical support query "There's nothing in the CM101/SR202/DS404 folder, is my CD faulty?". We then have to explain in detail how to persuade Windows to let you see DLL files

A simple installer gets around this problem quite neatly, and it's what the newbies expect. Obviously though you can't manage your plugin folder effectively unless you tell Windows not to hide DLL files so its something any heavy user of plugins eventually has to get to grips with.

As for the MSI format, it is free to developers, easy to use and integrates nicely with DevStudio as !j has pointed out. Also, since the software needed to interpret the MSI file is installed onto the host PC already, the setup file comes out quite small which is good for internet distribution.

If you're running ME/XP or 2K the necessary software to read MSI files is already installed as part of your OS. If you're running 98SE or older you have to install one little windows updater onto your PC to be able to use any MSI installer programs. Since Microsoft are heavily promoting MSI files as the installer for all of their stuff in the future then they'll slowly become more common and people in general will forget what all the fuss was about.

We evaluated MSI very closely a while back, and decided not to go with it just yet as there are still a lot of users who don't know what it is or how to use it properly. Something for the future maybe...

Cheers
Dave Waugh
Muon Software Ltd
www.muon-software.com

Its amazing sascha did you read the whole response or just the last line?

!j development wrote:

3. Some users may need the documentations, because our and other synthesizers are not even simple to program. 4. You have to accept the conditons and terms of the license first, before you install software.

Well, why not to include docs and license in zip file along with dll?
And who ever scrolls and reads license in installers?

!j development wrote:

9. Future projects cannot be delivered in a simple zip file anymore. These will need some registry entries and alot of additional system files.

Well, why not to make *.reg file and include in zip along with any files to be placed in /system folder?

There could be real need for an installer for some VSTi. But I hate those installers that put sh*t everywhere - in start menu, on desktop... what next? windows "quick lunch", or maybe in "Startup" an yes, don't forget the taskbar

VSTi is not a stand-alone app, it'a a plug-in after all!

Just as a sidenote, you can use a zip-file as an installer by using the SFX-extention. That way the user does not need an unzip program, the result is a neat installer that actually only unzips the contents to the choosen directory. You can give the SFX-file a default path for installation that can be overrided at installation time (so the user can point to a different plugin location.

Best of it all is that there are several free zip-programs that can build clean looking SFX-files. In my own company we use SFX-based installers for patches and stuff, while the development environment that we use has it's own integrated installer. SFX is in some cases preferable to us.

It seems to me that this is the best solution for plugin-installers. It is actually a zip-file (most zip-programs can convert an SFX back to plain ZIP-format), while it takes care of the problems mentioned by Dave from Muon.

The (free) one I use myself is here:
http://www.ultimatezip.com

crimsonwarlock wrote:

It seems to me that this is the best solution for plugin-installers. It is actually a zip-file (most zip-programs can convert an SFX back to plain ZIP-format), while it takes care of the problems mentioned by Dave from Muon. The (free) one I use myself is here: http://www.ultimatezip.com

Good idea. And yes, I am using ultimate zip as well.

But well, I still find Dave (Waugh)s comment reasonable - many people indeed don't know about hidden files, and even if you can enter a predefined path to unzip things in an SFX archive, the user might alter that path so the DLL ends up in some "non-vstplugins" directory.
The best thing here would be installers offering an option to search for *any* Vstplugin directories (many commercial plugins allready do so).

Btw, yes opiadream, I've been reading the complete post before I replied. The points didn't make much sense to me though - Dave W.'s comment however made much sense to me as I had quite a bunch of "support calls" (from friends that is) as well, just dealing with hidden DLLs.

Regards,
Sascha

Sascha Franck wrote:

and even if you can enter a predefined path to unzip things in an SFX archive, the user might alter that path so the DLL ends up in some "non-vstplugins" directory. The best thing here would be installers offering an option to search for *any* Vstplugin directories (many commercial plugins allready do so).

Another reason to hate installers... some installers don't even allow to change vstplugins directory. People are using different hosts. And they have to move things arounf after running intsller (and clean-up after it )

BTW what is considered to be the "default" vstplugin directory? Is it "Program Files\Steinberg\Cubase\Vstplugins" or "C:\Program Files\Steinberg\Vstplugins"? I feel like moving everything in that "conventional" directory to make installers happy

Sascha Franck wrote:

But well, I still find Dave (Waugh)s comment reasonable - many people indeed don't know about hidden files, and even if you can enter a predefined path to unzip things in an SFX archive, the user might alter that path so the DLL ends up in some "non-vstplugins" directory. The best thing here would be installers offering an option to search for *any* Vstplugin directories (many commercial plugins allready do so).

But a rookie user can go wrong in that case too. It's very much possible with such installers to enter a wrong drectory, and the DLL will still be hidden.

Besides, the BEST way to do things is to make a plugin available in both options; a full installer, and a plain zip-file (or SFX) for more advanced users. This is something that is already becoming standard policy in many other software areas.

Oh, and at the risk of getting very technical, even registry-keys can simply be distributed inside a zip-file and installed by advanced users. That way we can inspect the keys before they are added to the registry.

djstormrider wrote:

Sascha Franck wrote: and even if you can enter a predefined path to unzip things in an SFX archive, the user might alter that path so the DLL ends up in some "non-vstplugins" directory. The best thing here would be installers offering an option to search for *any* Vstplugin directories (many commercial plugins allready do so). Another reason to hate installers... some installers don't even allow to change vstplugins directory. People are using different hosts. And they have to move things arounf after running intsller (and clean-up after it ) BTW what is considered to be the "default" vstplugin directory? Is it "Program Files\Steinberg\Cubase\Vstplugins" or "C:\Program Files\Steinberg\Vstplugins"? I feel like moving everything in that "conventional" directory to make installers happy

I have a centralized location VST plugin deirectory (in my caseD:\music\VST\plugins), further subdivided into fx and instruments. I point both cubase and Orion to this directory. I don't really mind installers, but I can see why some people would.


prog

i hate exe files!!

just gimmie the dll

I don't think your expectations are compatible with the features you guys are wanting from new synths: assignable midi controls, microtonal scales, user-defined user interface layouts, ... All these features require the plug-in to be able to remember its state across sessions, and on the PC, this information has to be stored into the registry (you don't want all these .ini files back from the win3.1 era, do you ?). Of course this means that, should you decide you don't want to keep the plugin after all, you need the registry to be cleaned up properly - hence the need for an installer / uninstaller.

Cheers,

'Tick

I am barely computer-literate and I have no problem with unzipping a dll file and putting it in the proper place . . . my beef with any of this is the fact that you all name the readme files "readme" . . . when I drop the dll and then the readme in their, I get the old "I already have a file called that in here" bullshit.

How about naming those things the name of your plugin.readme?

"BTW what is considered to be the "default" vstplugin directory? Is it "Program Files\Steinberg\Cubase\Vstplugins" or "C:\Program Files\Steinberg\Vstplugins"?"

It's the one in the registry under the the entry HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\VST\VSTPluginsPath