KVR Audio

Music Engineer · Post by **Music Engineer** » Mon Jul 02, 2007 11:27 pm

In the rubberfilter-thread, the question was raised, if it is desirable to have an installer for plugIns or if it is preferable to have a plain archive, which the user has to extract himself into his plugIn folder. i think, this question makes up for a dedicated thread. i'm interested in what type of installation people prefer and why. may be we could collect some pros and contras for and against installers here. i'll begin with

pro installer:
-easy to use

contra:
-installers may pollute the system (registry, etc.)

Funkybot's Evil Twin · Mon Jul 02, 2007 11:57 pm

I voted for the cleaner registry.

As far as easy to use goes, if you can operate a sequencer, you can use an extraction program. Software geared towards non-power users needs installers, not audio software. I think people just have this belief that an installer makes a product more professional (which is of course, not true).

Cordelia · Post by **Cordelia** » Tue Jul 03, 2007 12:04 am

I don't understand he need for installers in most cases. There are several FX I've passed on using because of .exe files. I'd like to make my own choices, keep my system as clean as possible.

NAD · Post by **NAD** » Tue Jul 03, 2007 12:21 am

I cannot understand why developers INSIST on packaging their software in bloated installers! All I want is a DLL and a PDF and I'll put them where I like! No need for another folder in Program Files. No need for an entry in Add/Remove Programs. No need for random readme's and such cluttering up my VST folder. When I am forced to use an installer I always try and copy the DLL (and PDF, if there is one) and UNINSTALL the bugger, if I can get away with it. Usually the plugin still works fine. I hate installers for VST's and I think they're stupid.

BLynx · Post by **BLynx** » Tue Jul 03, 2007 12:25 am

(deleted)

Debutante · Post by **Debutante** » Tue Jul 03, 2007 12:37 am

Just wondering..., and I prefer naked .dll's (only because you can just dump them and not go through the whole folder selection for every sinlge plugin - a real pain in the butt after an HD crash for 20+ plugins, or reorganizing folders

), but has anyone actually ever had a problem with registry entries from installed plugins screwing up their what?... projects?, computers?, sequencers?? What's wrong with installers aside from the two little things I mentioned?

I've never bogged down anything to a cluttered registry. I clean mine about once every two months and never even notice an improvement in performance. How big a deal is this really??

If you have something to clean and pack your registry then all should be well, correct? How many people here can tell when their registries are getting bloated by performance?

Most commercial plugins need registry for protection, some freebies need to store settings. What's all the hubub? Has anyone here actually had a registry so full that it actually ruined their ( )? Isn't a neat and efficient registry up to you to maintain anyway, and not the devs problem? Doesn't every other program you have installed on your PC leave shitloads more entries than a few plugins? Any one of other apps can likely have more registry entries than all your plugin installs combined.

I'm not trying to be combative; it looks to me more like giving the devs an unnecessary hard time

BLynx · Post by **BLynx** » Tue Jul 03, 2007 1:13 am

(deleted)

Polite Company · Post by **Polite Company** » Tue Jul 03, 2007 1:18 am

I prefer archives w/straight DLLs but it isn't really a strong preference.

If it is a commercial plug-in I don't care if it's installed or just unzipped but I prefer zipped for free stuff because it is much easier to test out something if I can just DL it extract to my plug-in folder and fire up my DAW and than just delete it if I don't like it. I also like to keep my system as clean as possible.

bobsled · Post by **bobsled** » Tue Jul 03, 2007 2:10 am

Holy crap, kinda lopsided results (so far)!

Installers suck.

Music Engineer · Post by **Music Engineer** » Tue Jul 03, 2007 2:11 am

Funkybot's Evil Twin wrote:I think people just have this belief that an installer makes a product more professional (which is of course, not true).

hah! you got me. just some weeks ago, i learned how to build an installer for exactly that reason. looking at the votes, it seems, i can forget about that stuff again.

Michael Benjamin · Post by **Michael Benjamin** » Tue Jul 03, 2007 2:29 am

this vote was done in a millisec.
no no no no installer. i detest programs that create useless folders everywhere over the system.
if it was me at microsoft, the stupid "my documents/music/etc" would also be banned forever. as if the rest on the harddisk was not mine.

Shy · Post by **Shy** » Tue Jul 03, 2007 4:36 am

No installer, no writing to registry.

dreaddd · Post by **dreaddd** » Tue Jul 03, 2007 4:43 am

LOL
know what? i was about posting this poll some days ago myself from workplace but then customers got in and i forgot..

and let me say for me at least i damn hate installers for putting a simple dll on a folder, particularly when they create 129238 folders trees or change my default vst folder path while installing

Peace

CapnLockheed · Post by **CapnLockheed** » Tue Jul 03, 2007 5:25 am

No brainer...I f*cking hate installers!!

Cheers.....CL

de la Mancha · Post by **de la Mancha** » Tue Jul 03, 2007 6:34 am

dll/zip/rar please, just easier for me to open/copy/paste wherever i want it and move it later

KVR Audio

Installer or not? what do you prefer?

Do you prefer plugIns (or software in general) to come with an installer or as a plain .zip archive?