Re: app-encapsulation and transparent-install (MS is doing it)

[foofboy foofnet dyn ml org]

> Thus, the user never knows anything about 'installation'.

That's one of the things I hated most about Win 95 on my own box. I just couldn't control what was installed or updated, nor did I know what I could safely delete.

I support a 95 Application for a living, and about half my calls relate to just this sort of 'ease of use' feature, automatic upgrading of DLL files. To be honest, I don't know whether that's something that can be implemented better by gnome than by MS (I mean, is it possible to implement a feature better than MS does? ;) ). I do know that I would hate to have this happening on my home box. 

However, a sysadmin, running a network for a bunch of end users might appreciatethis feature. I mean only having to update one server, and knowing that all the workstations will upgrade themselves next time they need to use the app. Perhaps a system administrator could clarify.

In short, I don't want the computer to try to be smarter than I am, if only because it's so embarrasing when it succeds.

I look forward to hearing more details, though. Perhaps it's not what I think it is.

Rob