In article <210143.99329...@web36607.mail.mud.yahoo.com>,
Christopher Painter <chr...@deploymentengineering.com> writes:
> As usual, you are misquoting me Richard.
Its not misquoting you when I quote you verbatim.
Give me a break, get a life or both.
>I was replying to the statement:
Everyone reading this thread has already read your response and the
message that generated it. You're just repeating yourself now.
> "An installer and it's UI should be as fast as possible and should run on
> blank windows 2000 systems. In this way, it must not use .Net (and Java
> and so on ...)"
...and for MS products that targetted such systems they didn't
introduce a dependency on .NET *just* for UI for the installer.
Of course, Windows 2000 isn't supported anymore by MS products, and
most MS products these days leverage .NET in one way or another, so it
is not introducing a dependency on .NET to use it for the installer
UI.
However, the point still stands -- we are talking about not
introducing a .NET depencency where it isn't needed and gratuitously
using .NET for the installer UI when the rest of the application
doesn't need it is dumb.
Dependencies are what make installers complex and difficult to
maintain and manage. The fewer the dependencies, the better.
--
"The Direct3D Graphics Pipeline" -- DirectX 9 draft available for download
<http://www.xmission.com/~legalize/book/download/index.html>
Legalize Adulthood! <http://blogs.xmission.com/legalize/>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Open Source Business Conference (OSBC), March 24-25, 2009, San Francisco, CA
-OSBC tackles the biggest issue in open source: Open Sourcing the Enterprise
-Strategies to boost innovation and cut costs with open source participation
-Receive a $600 discount off the registration fee with the source code: SFAD
http://p.sf.net/sfu/XcvMzF8H
_______________________________________________
WiX-users mailing list
WiX-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wix-users
