suggestion about spybot's upgrade procedure. :)

I have noticed that many users have said they were automatically updated to version 1.6, and then they post wondering why they have 2 entries in add/remove programs. What i am wondering is, is it possible that in the future, when program updates are released through the spybot updater, they remove any version of spybot prior to installing the latest version? To prevent any issues that may occur. Md spybot fan and alot of others are always suggesting to remove spybot and then install the latest version. His post here explains why it is better this way. And I agree it keeps alot of problems from happening. I am enjoying spybot alot, and I am glad to see program updates are finally being offered in the program, but wouldn't this way, if possible, be much better for the customers? It might not be possible, which is why the spybot team has not done this yet, but I am just wondering. :)

I know maybe the reason is if teatimer is installed, it is a system file/process, and then as such maybe require a reboot in order to remove. But that is on the only thing i can come up with as to why this might not work. I still think it is possible for the spybot installer to shut down teatimer and remove teatimer and all traces (or most) of spybot, and then install the latest spybot version without a reboot needed. Any ideas anyone if this could work? it was just a thought to see if spybot could be even more amazing then it already is. :)

Spybot-Search&Destory is a good program, indeed :bow:.
And I have to say it has some good functions, which is both a watchdog and your armor. IMHO, I have to say it is good, because this is one of the programs (maybe only) to integrate both spyware scanning and HOSTS file protection.

One potential problem is that for users who aren't familiar with Spybot-SD's gears and workings, they wind up with two entries in the Add/Remove Programs window.

As an example, SAS and Comodo's BoClean offer/prompt the user to uninstall all previous versions of the product before upgrading.

Yes, upgrading is all well and good -but- in my considered opinion, program upgrades are best served as a definitively prompted action with full user awareness. None of this 'click here for the latest, greatest up-to-datest' or having an option preselected that isn't a normal part of the expected weekly update. How many users have been 'bitten' by not undoing immunizations as part of the process? Or any of a number of scenarios that could result in a less than optimal SSD experience - it happens with regularity as the lively nature of the forum attests to.

This is a great and helpful community doing some terrific work with a fine product line getting more improvements all the time, highly reponsive to the needs of a variety of users. Even the moderation is, shall I say, moderate and open :D: May it ever be so.

Actually this is just an installer issue. The reason why this happens is, that the guy who writes InnoSetup installer script always uses a different AppId directive. If he always used the same AppId, the installer would automatically find the previous installation, and upgrade it, instead of adding a new entry.

129260:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 129260

I have noticed that many users have said they were automatically updated to version 1.6, and then they post wondering why they have 2 entries in add/remove programs. ...

---

khagaroth:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by khagaroth

Actually this is just an installer issue. ...

---

You're correct but the problem should not continue to reoccur in the future as I attempted to explain in this post.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by md usa spybot fan

129260:



khagaroth:


You're correct but the problem should not continue to reoccur in the future as I attempted to explain in this post.

---

Thank you md usa spybot fan for the link. :)

Regarding the prompted action, one example:

The TeaTimer discussion here didn't say a single word about the balloons that are showing TeaTimers progress. But now that this TeaTimer is out, people are starting to complain how annoying it is.

There are always some users wanting it all, and some users who don't want to be confronted but just want it to "work".

Some users even get quite pissed of if you try to get their awareness, you should've seen some of the mails "asking" about the balloons :D:

Finding a middle way between those two fractions can be quite hard ;)

Patrick,

I understand completely, we've had many more comments on notifications in the Windows Live OneCare forums, especially during the original Public beta and the first few months of release. What the OneCare development group appears to have decided is to remove all but the most necessary notifications, since the "just want it to work" group is their intended audience.

Actually, what I realized is that some people are much more easily distracted than others, so they don't want anything but very urgent notifications. Then there are those like myself who can glance, understand and click the correct selection in seconds. Most are somewhere in between these extremes.

The optimum situation is obvious, don't prompt by default unless it's absolutely necessary, but allow configuration by those who will look more deepely and find the option to see more if they wish. This combination is appropriate for Spybot S&D, which is really a skilled users tool and will only become truly safe for basic users if it's stripped of most of its tools and sophisticated controls.

The core issue is that no one program can ever serve both groups equaly well, since skilled technical users always want lots of configuration and notification and basic non-technical users require exactly the opposite. Anything in between is simply a mediocere compromise between the two. The only way to truly please both is to create two entirely different builds.

I've seen how you are attempting to serve both by moving toward a modular structure where more technical portions could be 'left out' or ignored. However, unless you clearly indicate a simple choice between 'simple' and 'expert' user modes during installation, the non-technical user simply gets lost due to uninformed choices made at the beginning. Fundamentally, these people don't want to read anything and thus they can't/won't make appropriate choices for themselves.

The basic flaw with even 'good' software engineers is they want to provide effective choices for the user, but the greatest number of users don't want to make a choice. This is why 'Apple' like products will win in the long run, because they are simple to use, limit the users choices and make most of them completely obvious.

Bitman