Software Standards

  • Thread starter Thread starter Sanford Aranoff
  • Start date Start date
S

Sanford Aranoff

We must vigorously enforce standards for software installations. After
suffering a reinstall of the OS, I see the very important need for a
national or international agency to mandate these standards.

If the installation requires a previous installation be uninstalled,
then this should be done automatically. Much too often a user installs
the app without uninstalling the previous app, causing all types of
problems to arise.

The application must create an Install directory as a subdirectory of
the application. This will contain a log file and registry entries.
• If any registry settings are modified, the install would export the
settings to the Install directory before and after making the mods.
• If any registry settings are added, the install would export these
settings.
• All files added to the system would be listed, along with attributes
(like hidden)
• A separate list of files, which spyware programs may flag, would be
given.

The user should have the ability to deactivate (by renaming) the
possible spyware files to see how the application would run without
these files.

All software must conform to these standards, including operating
systems.

A reinstall should be easy, by importing to the registry and copying the
files. Users should be able to copy the files and Install directory to a
backup disk for the purpose of reinstalling in case of a system crash.

An explicit list would prevent bad stuff from getting into computers.
The standards agency would certify the software.
 
Sanford Aranoff said:
We must vigorously enforce standards for software installations. After
suffering a reinstall of the OS, I see the very important need for a
national or international agency to mandate these standards.
Click to expand...

--snipped for brevity--

....and how do they force every software vendor to comply to these standards
on a national and international level? How would this agency track
compliance of the literally millions of different software products out
there, checking every service update and new version? Would all software
vendors freely hand over their source code so the agency could ensure
compliance? How about private citizens who write and distribute freeware on
their own time?

Most importantly who's paying for all this? (rhetorical question) I'll tell
you who. You, me and everybody else who buys software. The cost of running
such an agency would be astronomical and ultimately passed on to the
consumer in one way or another. The cost of maintaining compliance would
send the price of software through the roof and would force the small shops
out of business all together.

Good intention. Bad idea.
 
Sanford

The structures exist to agree standards but they have no powers
to enforce standards. The resources available to the organisations
devising standards are infinitesimal compared to the commercial
enterprises selling successful software.

In for example email programmes Outlook Express goes against
many standards but who is to say whether standards set in the early
days of the Internet are appropriate today or should be changed?
Arguments over HTML and Plain Text and Top and Bottom Posting
abound and generate great heat. However, the advocates of Usenet
standards use lesser known mail programmes and are a small minority
compared to the greater majority, who use Outlook Express. You
have a minority who wish to dictate what the majority should use.

Sorry but market forces are likely to prevail. You need to offer
something more attractive than grand principles to achieve the result
you would like to see.

--

Regards.

Gerry
~~~~
FCA
Stourport, England

Enquire, plan and execute
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 
D

It has existed for years! It has international status! It has no enforcement
powers.

--

Regards.

Gerry
~~~~
FCA
Stourport, England

Enquire, plan and execute
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 
Sanford said:
We must vigorously enforce standards for software installations. After
suffering a reinstall of the OS, I see the very important need for a
national or international agency to mandate these standards.

If the installation requires a previous installation be uninstalled,
then this should be done automatically. Much too often a user installs
the app without uninstalling the previous app, causing all types of
problems to arise.

The application must create an Install directory as a subdirectory of
the application. This will contain a log file and registry entries.
• If any registry settings are modified, the install would export the
settings to the Install directory before and after making the mods.
• If any registry settings are added, the install would export these
settings.
• All files added to the system would be listed, along with attributes
(like hidden)
• A separate list of files, which spyware programs may flag, would be
given.

The user should have the ability to deactivate (by renaming) the
possible spyware files to see how the application would run without
these files.

All software must conform to these standards, including operating
systems.

A reinstall should be easy, by importing to the registry and copying the
files. Users should be able to copy the files and Install directory to a
backup disk for the purpose of reinstalling in case of a system crash.

An explicit list would prevent bad stuff from getting into computers.
The standards agency would certify the software.
Click to expand...

Yup. Standards to exist. They range from common sense to
some very particular legal ones pertaining to all of the
points mentioned. Now find someone to enforce them to the
hilt. For example, who from the Anti-Terrorism Task Force
would like to deliver the death sentence to SONY for its
DRM fiasco?

In the meantime, RTFM...read the f--king manual, if there
is one for the particular product before installing. If not,
then check the particular website. More often than not, the
instructions are pretty specific. If one wishes to inspect
better the installation of any particular application and
how the files and registry entries are handled, all that's
needed is to look into the installation *.inf files and
*.ini files for it. One must protect oneself if no other
resources are pre-disposed to do it.
 
HillBillyBuddhist said:
--snipped for brevity--

...and how do they force every software vendor to comply to these standards
Click to expand...

Very simple. The agency would issue a certificate of compliance. When people
buy software, they may think more carefully about buying certified software.

Standards must be updated periodically. Old standards are useless, as you
mention.
 
Very simple. The agency would issue a certificate of compliance. When people
buy software, they may think more carefully about buying certified software.

Standards must be updated periodically. Old standards are useless, as you
mention.
Click to expand...

May I suggest that if possible we developers try to adopt these standards.
 
Sanford said:
Very simple. The agency would issue a certificate of compliance. When people
Click to expand...

Thinking more about this, I can write a program that would compare the registry
before and after the install, and give a list of all files deleted or added by the
install. This would take out the mystery of the installation process.

Happy New Year!
 
| | >
| > | >> We must vigorously enforce standards for software installations. After
| >> suffering a reinstall of the OS, I see the very important need for a
| >> national or international agency to mandate these standards.
| >
| > --snipped for brevity--
| >
| > ...and how do they force every software vendor to comply to these
| > standards on a national and international level? How would this agency
| > track compliance of the literally millions of different software
products
| > out there, checking every service update and new version? Would all
| > software vendors freely hand over their source code so the agency could
| > ensure compliance? How about private citizens who write and distribute
| > freeware on their own time?
| >
| > Most importantly who's paying for all this? (rhetorical question) I'll
| > tell you who. You, me and everybody else who buys software. The cost of
| > running such an agency would be astronomical and ultimately passed on to
| > the consumer in one way or another. The cost of maintaining compliance
| > would send the price of software through the roof and would force the
| > small shops out of business all together.
| >
| > Good intention. Bad idea.
| >
| > --
| > D
| >
|

| D
|
| It has existed for years! It has international status! It has no
enforcement
| powers.
|
| --
|
| Regards.
|
| Gerry
| ~~~~
| FCA
| Stourport, England
|
| Enquire, plan and execute
| ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
|

The linchpin phrase in the OPs' argument is for a controlling agency with
power to "mandate."

An international standards organization that consorts and agrees vs. one
with the power to make *it's* standards mandatory are vastly different
animals. The former is a necessity, the later would be a beast.
 
Sanford said:
HillBillyBuddhist wrote:




Very simple. The agency would issue a certificate of compliance. When people
buy software, they may think more carefully about buying certified software.

Standards must be updated periodically. Old standards are useless, as you
mention.
Click to expand...

Certainly worthwhile pursuing. However, would you be willing
to pay for the rigorous testing and review in order to obtain
a certificate of compliance for each and every revision of your
application? Just ask those of us who work in the health care
industry; we need to obtain certification for each and every
country in which our code is used in patient care.
 
You could have a self certification scheme and a Kite mark.

--

Regards.

Gerry
~~~~
FCA
Stourport, England

Enquire, plan and execute
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 
The standard is there. So for any updates or mods as well.

Don't see any mass amount of people refusing to install software known to
have problems with deinstallation. Example, Symantec software products like
pre 2004 NAV by design. Post 2003 NAV due to various problems. My intent
is an example, not isolating NAV as the one and only deinstall problem in
windows XP.

Even the seemingly good ones do leave behind a directory(s) and/or some
orphaned registry entries.

There doesn't seem to be much effort in deinstallation verification by the
software writers, and all its little things that get left behind sometimes.
They don't get the picture, deinstall and leave the OS as it was before the
installation of said software. Try an MS Office 2000 or 2003 deinstall
sometime along with all of each of the SPs, and updates accompanied as
another example.
 
Sanford said:
We must vigorously enforce standards for software installations.
Click to expand...


Who is "we," and why are you making such a claim?

After
suffering a reinstall of the OS, I see the very important need for a
national or international agency to mandate these standards.
Click to expand...


Don't be absurd. Why would we need, or even want, government and/or
bureaucratic meddling in a purely technical matter?

If the installation requires a previous installation be uninstalled,
then this should be done automatically. Much too often a user installs
the app without uninstalling the previous app, causing all types of
problems to arise.
Click to expand...


If the user doesn't care to follow the instructions provided, then any
ensuing consequences are his responsibility. There's no need for
corporate or government hand-holding.

The application must create an Install directory as a subdirectory of
the application. This will contain a log file and registry entries.
• If any registry settings are modified, the install would export the
settings to the Install directory before and after making the mods.
• If any registry settings are added, the install would export these
settings.
• All files added to the system would be listed, along with attributes
(like hidden)
• A separate list of files, which spyware programs may flag, would be
given.
Click to expand...

It's clear that you have absolutely no understanding of the dynamic
nature of the registry. Following your patently absurd scheme, removing
any application so designed could easily cripple dozens of other,
subsequently installed applications.

The user should have the ability to deactivate (by renaming) the
possible spyware files to see how the application would run without
these files.
Click to expand...


Dream on. Spyware, by it's very nature, is the work of people with no
ethics; what makes you think that these people, who already flout
international laws and common decency, would adhere to your proposed
"software installation standards?"

All software must conform to these standards, including operating
systems.
Click to expand...


Again, says who? If you don't like the way a product works, simply
take your money elsewhere; buy a better, competing product. Market
forces will do the rest, once enough people follow suit.

A reinstall should be easy, by importing to the registry and copying the
files.
Click to expand...


Thereby recreating the precise configuration that caused the problems
that lead to the reinstallation in the first place? To what point, to
keep them going in circles?

Users should be able to copy the files and Install directory to a
backup disk for the purpose of reinstalling in case of a system crash.
Click to expand...


Why? Users already have the original installation media from which to
reinstall. Why waste storage space?

An explicit list would prevent bad stuff from getting into computers.
Click to expand...


How could the mere existence of a list prevent anything? Are you
saying that your users (who, by your own claim, can't read and follow
simple installation instructions) are going to take the time to compare
lists of tens of thousands of files with the contents of their hard drives?

The standards agency would certify the software.
Click to expand...

And who would certify the technical competence of the standards agency
and ensure that it's members aren't favoring one software manufacturer
over another? What are you, a former government bureaucrat looking for
another job, one that involves no honest work?


--

Bruce Chambers

Help us help you:



You can have peace. Or you can have freedom. Don't ever count on having
both at once. - RAH
 
That's done before.. InCtrl was one if I remember correctly..


--
Tumppi
=================================
Most learned on these newsgroups
Helsinki, FINLAND
(translations from/to FI not always accurate
=================================
 
Back
Top