Posted by jan kowalski on 12/06/06 07:00

On Mon, 4 Dec 2006 23:31:11 -0000, Sla#s wrote:
> More to the point - why on earth would anyone want to remove that directory?
> Remember when new programs installed to root ?
> You would end up with a root directory a mile long!

Are you crazy?
Almost nobody would desire, on purpose, a flat directory, let alone a flat
root directory. Why do you even suggest such an abomination?

A proper directory tree is O-R-G-A-N-I-Z-E-D!
Many educated users prefer to organize by F-U-N-C-T-I-O-N!
A proper directory tree (especially if huge) is almost certainly not
F-L-A-T!

How you organize is up to you. However, many intelligent Windows users
choose to organize in a variety of ways, almost none of which are by brand
name (although organizing by brand name could have merit for some).

Why do you think all well written programs allow you to install where you
want in the first place? To appease the sun gods?

How you organize is up to you. The important point is that YOU choose the
organization tree; not some dumb software installation hick who is proving
she is writing the very first program in her life and trying to pawn it off
on unsuspecting meek uneducated idiots who don't know any better.

For example, one (just one of many possible) organized file trees could be
- C:\programs\browsers\{netscape, ie, opera, etc}
- C:\programs\usenet\{dialog, agent, xnews, etc.}
- C:\programs\mailers\{thunderbird, eudora, pine, etc.}
- C:\programs\players\{quicktime, mediaplayer, irfanview, etc.}
etc.

Any software installer which contains a hard-coded path to the installation
tree, especially a ridiculous hard-coded path into one of the worst
designed installation trees imaginable, is proof of a badly written
program. Period.

Is there ANY known advantage whatsoever to a program insisting on
installing only into a flat program files hierarchy?

jan

[Back to original message]