Why not .pkg (next, next, installer)? For the past week, I've been tweaking my startup's CLI to install as a .pkg, satisfy Apple signing, and everything that goes along with that. I've often wondered why so many companies opt for the icon method.
As a user I don’t like installer packages as much because without special utilities, they’re opaque and it’s hard to tell what they’ll do.
Of course copied binaries can cause plenty of trouble too, but I have much less of a reason to give an installed program admin privileges than I do an installer.
It makes more sense if one thinks of the disk image files as digital analogues to thumb drives, optical discs, etc.
In the Classic Mac OS days a decent chunk of software (especially shareware/indieware) didn't have an installer and was just a folder you copied from a floppy disk or CD, which this process kinda mimics. You're just opening a file instead of putting in a disc.
I’ve always appreciated the effort and creativity developers put into making this a good experience, and a learning experience for new users. After all, you never know which app will be someone’s first install. A well made dmg was how I learned to install apps on OS X when I first moved to it 23 years ago.
Some developers have gotten lazy with this and expect users to just know. As a result I’ve seen many people running an app out of the dmg file itself for a long time, then they wonder why they have a bunch of stuff mounted.
It's fine for installing, but uninstalling is madness: Windows uninstallers try to clean up all the registry and user profile stuff they install. Mac apps seem to just leave stuff behind in Local Settings or Caches forever? Containers are not such a bad idea.
Same here. I’m least familiar with macOS compared to Windows and Linux, but the uninstall story on Mac was always baffling to me.
On Windows, it’s not perfect because it’s ultimately cooperative, but at least the developer of the application can also configure how it should be uninstalled. If you mostly stick to “reputable” applications, you know they would have gotten so many complaints about random things they leave behind that they slowly fix their uninstaller. Also you usually get the option to completely uninstall or keep data files, etc. Though it’s not universal. Uninstaller apps like CCleaner used to be more popular, but I hardly hear about these things anymore and usually advise against them.
On Linux, the story is slightly better as you rely on your distro package maintainer to configure the right uninstall logic. Removing random config files in /etc/ or data files in /var/ or systemd units, etc. Usually maintainers get it right as long as you stick to those feeds, and when something is missed it’ll get fixed eventually.
On Mac it seems to be either google it to get a list of locations to clean (which is what I do), or just delete the folder and ignore the random files or use CleanMyMac ($19.99) or CCleaner ($12.99) or MacAppBeGone (that’ll be $8.99) etc. luckily you can try to stick to homebrew and the App Store, but it’s limiting.
Counterpoint: you reinstall something later and all your setting and preferences are still there.
It’s a classic cloud vs disk debate about where and who should persist and own the data. Lately I think it’s kinda refreshing that it’s entirely on your disk and up to you.
I switched to Windows in the year 2000, or 2002, around then. It used to be cool because "the app is just a file that you can place anywhere, or trash when done" was true. They arrived usually as Stuffit or Binhex archives, rarely as disk images. There was no fussy "applications folder" with special permissions. You decompressed the file to anywhere and ran it. If you felt like updating something, this was accomplished by going and getting a new one.
I agree entirely, my Mac is full of half leftover data from old apps.
But that is quite independent from the creativity people show in these install workflows. You could have both a cool .dmg and a proper uninstallation process (but we don’t, for the most part).
I bought AppZapper years ago, and it still works. There's a free tool out there somewhere as well.
Don't knock on this feature, it can be a lifesaver if you've lost the license info. When you reinstall, sometimes the app can retrieve the license from old files.
Yeah, it's about how Windows has .msi installers, whereas for MacOS it's a .dmg where you copy the exec binary (which itself is a folder) into the /Applications folder.
Why not .pkg (next, next, installer)? For the past week, I've been tweaking my startup's CLI to install as a .pkg, satisfy Apple signing, and everything that goes along with that. I've often wondered why so many companies opt for the icon method.
As a user I don’t like installer packages as much because without special utilities, they’re opaque and it’s hard to tell what they’ll do.
Of course copied binaries can cause plenty of trouble too, but I have much less of a reason to give an installed program admin privileges than I do an installer.
I'll never forget the first time that dreadful window appeared. I was frustrated for 10min, eventually turning to my phone to search for what to do.
It makes more sense if one thinks of the disk image files as digital analogues to thumb drives, optical discs, etc.
In the Classic Mac OS days a decent chunk of software (especially shareware/indieware) didn't have an installer and was just a folder you copied from a floppy disk or CD, which this process kinda mimics. You're just opening a file instead of putting in a disc.
This is a nice little archive of all these different installers.
I’d almost forgotten about all this madness since I’ve been using homebrew to install stuff for over a decade
Macs are fun.
Too bad nobody needs to eject a floppy disk anymore :D
I’ve always appreciated the effort and creativity developers put into making this a good experience, and a learning experience for new users. After all, you never know which app will be someone’s first install. A well made dmg was how I learned to install apps on OS X when I first moved to it 23 years ago.
Some developers have gotten lazy with this and expect users to just know. As a result I’ve seen many people running an app out of the dmg file itself for a long time, then they wonder why they have a bunch of stuff mounted.
It's fine for installing, but uninstalling is madness: Windows uninstallers try to clean up all the registry and user profile stuff they install. Mac apps seem to just leave stuff behind in Local Settings or Caches forever? Containers are not such a bad idea.
Same here. I’m least familiar with macOS compared to Windows and Linux, but the uninstall story on Mac was always baffling to me.
On Windows, it’s not perfect because it’s ultimately cooperative, but at least the developer of the application can also configure how it should be uninstalled. If you mostly stick to “reputable” applications, you know they would have gotten so many complaints about random things they leave behind that they slowly fix their uninstaller. Also you usually get the option to completely uninstall or keep data files, etc. Though it’s not universal. Uninstaller apps like CCleaner used to be more popular, but I hardly hear about these things anymore and usually advise against them.
On Linux, the story is slightly better as you rely on your distro package maintainer to configure the right uninstall logic. Removing random config files in /etc/ or data files in /var/ or systemd units, etc. Usually maintainers get it right as long as you stick to those feeds, and when something is missed it’ll get fixed eventually.
On Mac it seems to be either google it to get a list of locations to clean (which is what I do), or just delete the folder and ignore the random files or use CleanMyMac ($19.99) or CCleaner ($12.99) or MacAppBeGone (that’ll be $8.99) etc. luckily you can try to stick to homebrew and the App Store, but it’s limiting.
Counterpoint: you reinstall something later and all your setting and preferences are still there.
It’s a classic cloud vs disk debate about where and who should persist and own the data. Lately I think it’s kinda refreshing that it’s entirely on your disk and up to you.
I switched to Windows in the year 2000, or 2002, around then. It used to be cool because "the app is just a file that you can place anywhere, or trash when done" was true. They arrived usually as Stuffit or Binhex archives, rarely as disk images. There was no fussy "applications folder" with special permissions. You decompressed the file to anywhere and ran it. If you felt like updating something, this was accomplished by going and getting a new one.
I agree entirely, my Mac is full of half leftover data from old apps.
But that is quite independent from the creativity people show in these install workflows. You could have both a cool .dmg and a proper uninstallation process (but we don’t, for the most part).
I bought AppZapper years ago, and it still works. There's a free tool out there somewhere as well.
Don't knock on this feature, it can be a lifesaver if you've lost the license info. When you reinstall, sometimes the app can retrieve the license from old files.
Is the quote in the title a reference to something?
Yeah, it's about how Windows has .msi installers, whereas for MacOS it's a .dmg where you copy the exec binary (which itself is a folder) into the /Applications folder.
Or any folder. Most of my apps are in sub folders organized by category. :)
Ok but who said the quote?
It’s in TFA, but the post title is without the “very”