why do windows programs always have these cancerous installers

>>58807738
>accept and install
>malware fighter

>>58807738
>always
only if you're a retard and choose garbage software

>>58807754
>Defending this.
As long you people keep accepting it the situation will never change.

>>58807784
which good software on Windows doesn't have an installer?

Installing malware makes money for those whose malware it is.
Paying people to include it in their installers is a good way to get coverage.

Linux on the other hand has vetted databases of software.

>>58807837
Ffmpeg

>>58807962
Try one that actually installs instead of being portable, and has a GUI

>>58807738
upstream packages

>>58807828
He's right. If Linux was the standard desktop os and had programs, you'd get that shit in Linux.

>>58808295
Except that's false, Linux uses package managers which makes individual installer solutions abundant.

File: d6655803fa1ca967710fc6c164508726.jpg (23KB, 500x385px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 500x385px

>>58807754
k

>>58808386
>implying steam doesn't have similar shit on linux

>>58808453
That's not Linux's fault, the OS offers a better solution which most software uses, whereas Windows doesn't

>>58808502
Doesn't windows have some sort of 'app store' as well?

>>58808593
Aye.

>>58808593
Yes, but it hardly contains any of the software you'd expect; not to mention that feature-wise it's nothing when compared to proper BSD/Linux package managers

I fear that as more and more Windows users migrate to Linux, they will bring all that shit with them. They ignore package managers and want to use separate installers, because that's what they're used to.

>>58808645
>it hardly contains any of the software you'd expect
Any windows user would say the same about linux package managers.

Either way, the point was that windows does provide better solutions to the cancerous installers in the OP. It's not window's fault that nobody uses it.

>>58808675
If they have a GUI like the Ubuntu Software Center, you can just distribute a link to that - and otherwise .deb files through gdebi should work just fine

>>58808688
Except the Windows problem is that the software exists for Windows, it's just not in the repos, whereas for Linux the software simply doesn't exist for Linux

Also, the Windows app store thing is pretty cancerous on its own

>>58807754
fpbp

>>58807784
like adobe flash?

>>58808714
So all linux software is in every distro's repo's? You're simply wrong about that.

>>58808774
Linux repos cover a far, far wider selection of packages than the Windows app store does

>>58808774
not him, but most other projects just have you build the source code yourself. Packages that have prebuild binaries tend to give you something that plugs into your package manager. I think I've seen one or two portable applications, as well.

IIRC, the android NDK uses an installer, but I don't recall anything else that does.

>>58808810
Right, but not everything is in there. Just like in windows it isn't.

>>58808847
And you can't build from source in windows?

>>58808865
But there is MORE in it
What you're saying is that F-Droid is just as good as the Play Store because neither contain 100% of all Android software

>>58808014
why ?

>>58808891
Because having a million loose files all around the OS isn't a good solution, if you don't know why that is then I suggest you drop technology off of your list of interests

>>58808865
>And you can't build from source in windows?
I suppose you could for some of the packages you're installing. You certainly can't if you're downloading a proprietary application like adobe flash. People tend to use a lot of proprietary applications on Windows, unlike on Linux.

Building from source is a lot easier on Linux than Windows because almost all of the library dependencies are typically available through the package manager. putting libraries into MinGW is a huge pain in the ass.

>>58808912
Because having a million programs modifying the registry is better ?
I didn't think so, /g/ood night

>>58808885
No I'm not. I'm just saying, truthfully, that windows, just like linux, does provide a better solution than these cancerous installers. Windows solution might not be as good or as mature as linux's. but it does exist. You just want to make this into a silly windows vs linux shillfest.

>>58808916
>You certainly can't if you're downloading a proprietary application like adobe flash.
You can't do that on linux either though.

File: what_year_is_it.jpg (59KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 480x360px

>>58808738
>adobe flash

>>58809035
yeah I download it through my package manager if I want it, since it's on my package manager. I don't have to play the 'try not to install McAffee' game on Linux.

GNU/Linux software has to abide by stricter rules and is generally all installed from a heavily moderated repository.

The real question is, why don't you see stuff like OP's pic on Mac OS?

>>58808865
>Right, but not everything is in there. Just like in windows it isn't.
I get the feeling you're just being contrarian here. If you write some software yourself right now it won't be in the repos, but aside from that, just about everything truly is in the repos. Even things that don't really need a package such as fonts are generally in the repos if the font is at all popular.

>>58809056
>I download it through my package manager
that is not what building from source means lad

>>58808934
Linux doesn't even use a registry

>>58809076
>I don't know how to read
shouldn't you be posting some windows 10 shilling threads?

>>58809059
Because macOS software typically comes in 1 file (secretly a folder) per programme, which all reside in 1 directory. IMO the best possible solution; works great with package managers too

>>58808295
No doubt any popular platform would get that. Yet still saying that linux has no software is an obvious hyperbole, he has no reason to say that unless he's genuinely ignorant which I seriously doubt. Obviously he doesn't want people mentioning that huge problem on Windows do he deflects the conversation towards bashing Linux, what is the point of doing this? Even if linux had the same problem that would not fix the problem windows users have.

>>58809075
You're just moving the goalposts. The argument here is whether or not windows provides better alternatives than cancerous installers. The fact is that yes, they do. I already said windows solution is inferior to linux's, but it exists nonetheless.

>>58809103
You're the one not reading here lad.

Funny how pointing out facts makes me a shill, only on /g/.

>>58809076
You can download sources through package managers

>>58809178
Sources of proprietary software? Lol, please explain.

>>58809190
it's simple, you deny being part of the botnet and download free software

Well, it's not like there isn't a way to ignore those softwares.

File: just works.app.png (8KB, 94x99px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 94x99px

>>58807738
>tfw too smart for installers

>>58807754
>because linux doesn't have any software

https://www.archlinux.org/packages/
>current number of packages in the main repos: 14963

https://aur.archlinux.org/
>current number of packages in the AUR: 38229

>>58809430
You do realize that each individual version of windows has at least 10 times that amount, don't you?

>>58809430
nobody cares about your broken shells scripts

>>58809455
>at least 10 times that amount
I highly doubt that...

Maybe with this awesome stuff:
>minecraft windows 10 edition
>candy crush saga
>some racing game with an icon of a red car with a face

>be a microcuck fag
>visit dubious websites
>download a shady installer
>add more bloat to my already bloated OS
>why has my default search provider been changed?
>where do these files on my desktop come from?
>why are there so many unknown processes running in the background after rebooting my machine?

>>58809542
>I highly doubt that...
You must be highly retarded then.

File: 1469192190705.jpg (23KB, 275x284px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 275x284px

>>58807754
Don't care if i'm a linux fanboy.
I found that funny.

File: chrome_2017-02-05_12-39-01.png (18KB, 148x106px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 148x106px

https://unchecky.com/

File: 49f.jpg (34KB, 413x395px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 413x395px

>>58809795
>windows requires a whole separate program just to avoid being scammed by installers

my fucking sides

GNU/Linux package managers are the ubermensch solution. We don't have to scour some random third party websites and download shady .exes in hopes they contain the program we want to run and not pure malware (as opposed to just bundled malware in the installer).

We have signed, secure, reviewed software repositories on civilized systems. Why can't Windows do the same?

>>58809926
>Why can't Windows do the same?
It can, they have an app store on windows 10 that serves the same purpose. It's just that no one uses it.

>>58810009
No, the appstore is a source of proprietary software controlled by microsoft and exists to enforce microsoft's control over the programs you install, and how you use them, unlike GNU/Linux repos which exists to provide secure binaries for programs you can usually also build yourself. It exists to help the user, not to restrict him and control him. They are not equivalent and don't even pretend they are, because only a retard would think that.

>>58810047
>the appstore is a source of proprietary software
You can put open source software there though. I think. It's not like I use it.

>>58808720
thats the sound your vagina makes when my dick goes into it

>>58809926
>GNU/Linux package managers
No such thing. Package managers are just a non-unix specific software solution you inherited from the server days, and because you couldn't find software otherwise.
Which is what pisses me off about a lot of linux propagandists. They mix up the advantages of the OS with those of the license and the hackish solutions they had to make to cope.
And they exist for every os that didn't wither away into non-existence 2 decades ago.
> Why can't Windows do the same?
We have package managers, you know?
Several, in fact.

>>58810205
>We have package managers, you know?
>Several, in fact.

And they all suck ass and are laughably limited compared to humble pacman.

File: Screenshot_10.png (68KB, 1169x387px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 1169x387px

>>58810237
It's the same shit.
Look, i even made a pic for you, so you would stop embarrassing yourself on the internet.
You can even drop the first 3 since microsoft, and the last 2 developed by game companies, and we still a number of them, in every form.

File: jdchwEr.png (4KB, 72x61px) Image search: [Google]

4KB, 72x61px

>>58809926
>linux users need some kind of safe space because they're too dumb to tell between legit installers and lostboy.tar.gz
>if you do a manual install the package manager shits itself

>>58809430
most of that stuff is just different versions and useless shit

>>58807754
/thread

>>58807738
Because it took until Windows 8 to have a "package manager", except that package manage is based on the idea of an 'app store' for phones, so it's even more cancerous and unused.

>>58807738
Because windows is a botnet OS used by total cucks and tech illiterates.

>>58811225
>92% of people using PC are tech illiterate cucks. Look at me I'm such a special snowflake holy shit

Ayy Lmao well mkay anon, how is your neet paycheck going?

>>58807738
Because Windows is trash. GNU/Linux distros like Ubuntu even have GUI software centers to install applications with one click now, but still offers a CLI for /g/ users who know the exact package they want to install. You can even get .deb files to install stuff on Debian based distros. GNU/Linux is superior, but faggots like >>58807754 and >>58807828 will cling to Windows, crying about a few pieces of CAD software and whatnot, trying to justify the microdick wedge between their cheeks. GNU/Linux also costs nothing.

>>58807738
Because people can't make money off developing for Linux.

>>58812542
Not true, I buy games for linux.
I'd also buy adobe products.
If anything, moving to linux made me more likely to spend money.
On windows I pirated everything

>>58812542
Yeah, obviously, all these companies:

https://wiki.linuxfoundation.org/en/Members

are in it for the fun of it

>>58812611
>all these companies
>worldwide
>less than 50
Wow, it's fucking nothing.

>>58807738
If Linux had as much marketshare as Windows, you'd see just as much garbage being pushed onto it. Android has no shortage of terrible "apps", for example.

>>58812730
There are PPAs for garbage. Repos get quality, reviewed stuff only.

>>58807738
Because Windows respects software owners' freedom to monetize their work. Thus there's a market to bundle shareware/SaaS with other software in the hopes that the user will install it, find the program useful, and buy the full version/subscribe. So freeware software can be made profitable by combining it with shareware.
You don't see this on Linux because all its software is free as in worth $0. There's no profit in bundling someone else's unpaid half-finished hobbyist project with their own.

>>58812854
lol

i know this is bait but you do know that one of essential freedoms of free software is the freedom to sell it right?

and monetize means "to use as a currency", not sell it for profit

>>58812880
>you do know that one of essential freedoms of free software is the freedom to sell it
Ok, what free software would you like? I'll sell you a copy of it for $10,000.

>>58808295
We don't get that shit in OS X.

>one thing is always the same as the other
BTFO

>>58807738
It's because you need installers to install things in Windows while in Linux, everything is done through the package manager.

>>58812936
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/selling.en.html

here's your redpill faggot now fuck off

>>58812978
What free software would you like? I'll sell you a copy for $10,000.

>>58812992
what's your point nigger?

>>58813006
I'm using my freedom to sell free software. It's not very effective at actually selling free software, now is it?

>>58807851
>Linux on the other hand has vetted databases of software.
Honestly even the stuff I've downloaded from the net and compiled from source hasn't had any of this shit
Probably helps that all the retarded normies use winshit

>>58813027
Yeah but that's because you're a dumb windows nigger

http://store.steampowered.com/app/431730

here's an example of a guy selling free software and making a living out of it

BTFO

now what?

>>58813027
What the fuck are you on about you retarded faggot?

>>58810307
>.tar.gz
fucking larper

File: aacs2.png (297KB, 945x1300px) Image search: [Google]

297KB, 945x1300px

>>58807754
/thread

>>58813088

1. GRANT OF LICENSE.
The SOFTWARE PRODUCT is licensed as follows:
(a) Installation and Use.
David Capello grants you the right to install and use copies of the SOFTWARE PRODUCT on your computer running a validly licensed copy of the operating system for which the SOFTWARE PRODUCT was designed.
(b) Backup Copies.
You may also make copies of the SOFTWARE PRODUCT as may be necessary for backup and archival purposes.

2. DESCRIPTION OF OTHER RIGHTS AND LIMITATIONS.
(a) Maintenance of Copyright Notices.
You must not remove or alter any copyright notices on any and all copies of the SOFTWARE PRODUCT.
(b) Distribution.
You may not distribute copies of the SOFTWARE PRODUCT to third parties. Evaluation versions available for download from David Capello's websites may be freely distributed.
(c) Prohibition on Reverse Engineering, Decompilation, and Disassembly.
You may not reverse engineer, decompile, or disassemble the SOFTWARE PRODUCT, except and only to the extent that such activity is expressly permitted by applicable law notwithstanding this limitation.
(d) Rental.
You may not rent, lease, or lend the SOFTWARE PRODUCT.
(e) Support Services.
David Capello may provide you with support services related to the SOFTWARE PRODUCT ("Support Services"). Any supplemental software code provided to you as part of the Support Services shall be considered part of the SOFTWARE PRODUCT and subject to the terms and conditions of this EULA.
(f) Compliance with Applicable Laws.
You must comply with all applicable laws regarding use of the SOFTWARE PRODUCT.
(g) Source code.
You may only compile and modify the source code of the SOFTWARE PRODUCT for your own personal purpose or to propose a contribution to the SOFTWARE PRODUCT.

Doesn't look free as in freedom to me.

>>58812668
don't quantify that

File: trashcan.jpg (87KB, 800x1000px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 800x1000px

>>58807738
back in my early teens i gave linux a chance becaust eof the proclaimed *modularity*

mfw every other program ended in dependeny hell

Never in my life had any problem with windows other than fucked up hw

>>58813094
I'll selling copies of free software for $10,000 each. How many can I write you down for?
I'm having a one day sale. Buy 10 for only $9,000 each.

>>58813160
>dependency hell
Wouldn't you expect a program which utilizes many modular subprograms to have lots of dependencies?

>>58813139
apparently it was GPL, but not anymore:
https://github.com/aseprite/aseprite/commit/5ecc356a41c8e29977f8608d8826489d24f5fa6c

>>58807738
even official shit from M$ does nowadays.

>>58813139
https://github.com/aseprite/aseprite

Here's the code, most licensed under GPL. That freedom enough for ya cunt?

>>58813246
Seems someone wanted to actually make real money on their software.

>>58813372
see
>>58813246
it's not gpl anymore.

You can of course still use the old gpl version. Or use the new one which is still free, just only free as in beer, not freedom.

>>58813422
>>58813372
I'll sell you the GPL version for $59.99. It's free as in freedom so it should be worth more than software burdened with a restrictive license, right?

>>58813160
stop using Slackware

>>58813470
No thanks, I'll pay for the official version.
I use linux, but I'm not one of those 'muh freedoms' guys.
I play games and most games aren't free, so I'd be a hypocrite if I demanded that all other software shall be free.

>>58813470
Did windows make you retarded, or did you choose windows because you were born that way?

>>58807754
this
linux also doesn't have any users so targeting it with ads isn't going to make anyone any money

>>58813582
If you're a freetard then you believe proprietary software should be illegal -- i.e. valued at $0. Thus if proprietary software is selling for $14.99, the GPL version is logically worth $28.98 as it is not burdened with a license worth -$14.99.
So I'll sell it to you for $28.98. How many copies are you down for?

>>58813795
*$29.98
I can't math today.

File: 1453575499122.jpg (105KB, 1248x618px) Image search: [Google]

105KB, 1248x618px

>>58813582
>cant refute
>lol i'll call him retarded that will show him

File: 1461732940311.png (174KB, 295x423px) Image search: [Google]

174KB, 295x423px

>>58807738
I'd just like to interject for a moment. What you're referring to as Linux, is in fact, GNU/Linux, or as I've recently taken to calling it, GNU plus Linux. Linux is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning GNU system made useful by the GNU corelibs, shell utilities and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by POSIX.

Many computer users run a modified version of the GNU system every day, without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of GNU which is widely used today is often called "Linux", and many of its users are not aware that it is basically the GNU system, developed by the GNU Project.

There really is a Linux, and these people are using it, but it is just a part of the system they use. Linux is the kernel: the program in the system that allocates the machine's resources to the other programs that you run. The kernel is an essential part of an operating system, but useless by itself; it can only function in the context of a complete operating system. Linux is normally used in combination with the GNU operating system: the whole system is basically GNU with Linux added, or GNU/Linux. All the so-called "Linux" distributions are really distributions of GNU/Linux.

>>58807773
>>58807738
>tfw I actually bought their "Advanced SystemCare PRO" when I was younger and considerably more retarded
>cue slow realization it's a chink shovelware clusterfuck designed to make normies feel good about progress bars that "fix" their shit
>feel like a fucking tool

Then after the license expired, they automatically charged me for another year without asking for permission.

File: silverlight installer bing pup.png (71KB, 555x361px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 555x361px

>>58807738
Even microsofts own installers are cancerous, let alone third party ones.

>>58807738
All of Linux is cancerous.

I always stop using a program when their makers start including bullshit in their installers. It's the point where they completely lose their trustworthiness. Recently dropped FileZilla because of this.

>>58813939
He's right tho. You're twisting what the other guy said to make it look like you found a hole in his logic but in fact it's obvious you're missing the point and you're making yourself look like a kid arguing.

>>58809014
retard

>>58813795
>>58813823
This is painful to watch at. Just accept you was wrong and provide a serious reasoning. You want a simple example? Look at collabora.

>>58818492
>in order to make money with free software you have to make broken software and then sell support
I'm glad proprietary exists.

File: smooth.gif (2MB, 500x281px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 500x281px

This is the reason why I'll always have a job.

>>58811268
By definition of the word cuckold, you are a cuckold if you use Windows.

>>58818591
>in order to make money with free software you have to make broken software and then sell support
Uh I guess there's not a point on trying to reason with you. Seem like you already know what you're talking about and you're baiting on purpose. Ok, have a good night then.

>>58807738

You know Spigot is a notorious malware vendor, right?
You're literally installing malware on your computer and you're complaining about shitty terms and conditions?

>>58808453
What?

>>58808714
>Except the Windows problem is that the software exists for Windows
Yeah that's a huge problem you fuckin idiot.

A problem of linux is that this software DOES NOT EXIST.

Do you get me?

>>58808810
>Linux repos cover a far, far wider selection of packages than the Windows app store does
That's because the linux package managers exist for a much longer time than the windows counterparts, how goddamn stupid are you?

>>58810237
>And they all suck ass and are laughably limited compared to humble pacman.
Both do not have adobe photoshop in them so what's your fuckin point?

>>58807738
If you still manage to download this shitware, you should probably learn to read, it'll probably help you if you ever get into a legal situation of any sort.

>>58807738
Windows Store doesn't have this problem

File: lel.png (572KB, 600x580px) Image search: [Google]

572KB, 600x580px

>>58816704