Just a followup for reference in case this issue comes up again: I have
come across an article referencing some of the issues raised in this thread
with respect to Windows Installer 5.0, which has explicit support for
dual-mode installs (at least for windows 7 and higher).

  http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd408068%28VS.85%29.aspx

This at least makes it easier for me to cater for both scenarios.

Microsoft has also apparently realized that it was a bit confusing not to
have defined a program files equivalent under the user's profile, so now
there is one: by default, it's C:\Users\<username>\AppData\Local\Programs
(see the above article for reference to this, where they state "When a user
installs the dual-purpose package on Windows 7 or Windows Server 2008 R2
using the per-user context, these components are saved in the Programs
folder of the current user (for example at %LocalAppData%\Programs) and can
be accessed only by that user.")

I think that pretty much answers the 'where to put it' issue for non-admin
installs, as this is now an officially 'blessed' location (and in AppData
to boot). While the above support only applies to Windows 7/Server 2008,
the location itself can be created (if it doesn't already exist) under
Vista by the installer itself.

I suspect it should also put to rest the complaints (I will point out that
this is not by any means the first thread complaining about the install
location) of any who have claimed that AppData is not for executable files
and/or that I eat babies for breakfast because I chose to use it rather
than good ol 'c:\program files'.

(Did I mention I also got roasted by another group of expert users for
moving to c:\program files from c:\povray when Windows 95 was introduced?
Deja vu. Hopefully this won't happen again in another 15 years. No, I'm not
bitter at all. Not in the least. Just jaded :-)

-- Chris

PS FWIW a little research shows that Google got blasted by users for doing
a similar thing with Chrome and Google Talk. So at least I'm not alone.

Post a reply to this message