Nullsoft's NSIS instead of current installer? Thread last updated on 2003-09-14 22:11:21

Posted by member 58037 on 2003-08-24 00:48:38

Did you think about using NSIS instead of the installer u're using now? Because it really looks a lot more professional and it's open-source (i think).. Also supports XP manifest.

Posted by member 7 on 2003-08-24 02:33:30 link

Which installer do you mean?

Posted by member 58037 on 2003-08-24 02:35:21 link

NSIS - NullSoft Install System..

Posted by member 7 on 2003-08-24 10:00:20 link

uhh, I meant which LS Installer. Afaik the recommended one, the "LS Installer" from Omar has always used NSIS.

Posted by member 58037 on 2003-08-24 10:03:14 link

what?? i've used the omar's installer and it doesn't look like NSIS to me.. :/

Posted by member 39367 on 2003-08-24 16:54:44 link

I think omars installer looks really good...

Posted by member 58037 on 2003-08-24 17:10:03 link

i don't.. it doesn't use xp manifest and it's not tuning in with the rest of my windows..

Posted by member 2112 on 2003-08-24 19:38:22 link

I can't even remember what it looks like. I've only installed LS twice. Once on my work machine and once on my home machine.

Posted by member 58037 on 2003-08-24 19:46:50 link

Well i'm not saying it's awful, i'm just saying that including the xp manifest would make it look a lot better (or if Omar is really using NSIS, it would be nice if he included the new interface also, looks much better)
LiteStep is indeed one of the finest applications i've seen and providing it freely is a really great act by whoever the author is. thanks *author* :)

Posted by member 35 on 2003-08-24 19:52:13 link

it's just an installer, it just needs to be easy to use.

Posted by member 58037 on 2003-08-24 19:59:23 link

nevertheless, it really doesn't give that open-source\freeware impression :) because freeware apps mostly have these nice compact installation programs, while shareware has some cheap ones because they can't use freeware.. and i'm just saying omar could include the manifest, it's only 1-2 KB for gods sake..

Posted by member 7 on 2003-08-25 00:52:06 link

Send him an email suggesting it.

Posted by member 333 on 2003-08-25 08:39:49 link

omar's probably finishing up an installer for OTS2 as I type, so like ilmcuts says: mail him about it.

oh, and as already noted, omar uses NSIS for his installer.

btw, it IS only an installer, the GUI is meant to be seen once (unless you keep installing it over and over), so if it doesn't fit in with your other windows, so what?!

Posted by member 1316 on 2003-08-25 10:47:57 link

as sryo and tuck mentioned, if the installer works, then who cares what it looks like??! it's up for 1 minute while everything installs, then you don't need to look at it until you need to install again.

Posted by member 58037 on 2003-08-25 13:02:41 link

eh, why not make it look nicer if you can? with minimal size penalty? that's like you'd be able to add a nice icon for the tray icon for an applcation, and it's only 1KB, but ahh, you only see the tray icon when you minimize it so even if it's 1KB.. wrong thinking.. always try to do the best you can.

Posted by member 1316 on 2003-08-25 15:06:51 link

yeah, but a systray icon you may see a couple times a day, so then it would be worth. the installer you may see a couple times a year, IF that often.

Posted by member 35 on 2003-08-25 16:40:43 link

true, the last and only time i've seen the installer was Friday 15th of March 2002.

Posted by member 58037 on 2003-08-25 18:16:09 link

eh you don't see the point.. i like enjoying everything i do.. every moment counts.. LOOK it's only one line in NSIS script !include XPManifest or something like that! don't be so god damn stubern

Posted by member 2112 on 2003-08-25 21:47:47 link

Who's being stubborn? You've posted your suggestion in the forum and you've recieved other people opinions. That's what forums are for. But I don't think anyone who has commented is resposible for the installer and is preventing such a feature.

Posted by member 58037 on 2003-08-25 21:52:08 link

well ok, but you are all opposing it, and i do not see the reason.. it's a very small adition and i think it's well worth even that little kilobyte. you really get more impressed or in other words a better first impression if the installer also looks nice. and it's worth it especially for this small of a price. especially with litestep which is actually based on the image\looks of things. it was just a suggestion, you don't have to bombard me.. but i really don't see any disadvantage in this

Posted by member 35 on 2003-08-25 22:09:27 link

hey, nobody is opposing to it, you should suggest it to omar, for the upcoming ots2 installer. i think he didn't add it before because he uses win2000.

what drworm and me said is that it's not needed to make the installer look more *professional*, and unless you are a freak you wont be seeing the installer too often.

Posted by member 58037 on 2003-08-25 22:15:44 link

eh i don't have time to take notice in things like that.. if he sees it in the forum then he'll make it, else he won't, i don't really care that much, i just wanted to make a point.

Posted by member 265 on 2003-09-12 14:54:22 link

The switch to the modern interface of NSIS is not anywhere near as trivial as you think it is MrBrdo.

I tend to agree with the others, posting in a forum accomplishes nothing unless by some amazing coincidence I see it. ;)

In any case, I decided on my own months ago to create the best looking installer possible (amongst other things)...

I think you'll all be quite pleased when you see the final result. :)

Posted by member 58037 on 2003-09-13 07:41:10 link

omar: groovy ;)

Posted by member 265 on 2003-09-13 09:12:08 link

a fellow Bruce Campbell fan? ;)

Posted by member 58037 on 2003-09-13 12:13:15 link

nope, sorry.. :)

Posted by member 265 on 2003-09-14 22:11:21 link

pity. :P