Portable package platforms - what's the benefit?

[ajfudge]

I searched this forum intensively and I know that with regards with these bunch of questions I have, none has been enlightening.
This isn't about LiberKey vs PortableApps. That issue is old. Let's move on.
What I want to know may be helpful to others too, and frankly more important to uneducated like me:

1) What really is the benefit of using PortableApps and WinPenPack platforms? Don't chastise me just yet. I know using PA or WPP can be very useful as those packages will take good care to centralize the program's folders and files in a single directory like what it does to portable browsers. I also know that there are portable programs that tend to create its settings and other files to User folder, and those packages will make sure that those sensitive files gets moved to its parent program.
But if a developer already offers a working and authentic portable version of his/her product, what's the point of PA or WPP creating their own packages? Case in point: Stickies, PNotes, those are at the top of my head right now. It just makes me confused. Which portable version should I trust: PA's, WPP's or the developer's? The most stealth? The official, developer-made release?

2) PA and WPP are two of the most popular packages and is widely offered here at Portable Freeware Collection. Is one better than the other? In what way? Before, I used to download each platform's versions just to test them if it work. They do work, and I notice the difference in occupied disk space. At the end of the day, I'm clueless which version to keep.

3) I neither use PA or WPP launcher. I don't name the portable program's folder as "X-ProgramName" or "ProgramNamePortable". And I update my portables manually (especially Firefox, since I could just copy my installed Firefox's files to the portable's), what else, beyond those aforementioned features, can I benefit from using the launchers?

4) And lastly, what's your opinion on programs that has been made as virtual portable packages, like Cameyo- or ThinInstall-created programs? I don't use them but are they ideal?

Thanks!

[freakazoid]

1) Always go native first. PA sometimes helps to keep portable file paths, but I tend not to need that functionality.

2) They both do a similar thing. I don't really prefer one or the other. If one of them is updated more often, I'll use that one. Although I should note that PA adds an extra process (ProgramNamePortable.exe) to see whether the app is closed or not, while WPP doesn't. View the Task Manager to see. PA also sometimes offers 64-bit versions of the programs, which is useful if you switch between 32-bit and 64-bit OSs a lot.

3) I don't use launchers, but I sometimes use PA or WPP packaged apps if the native program does not support portable settings by default. Like you, I also rename the folder names for PA / WPP apps.

4) I haven't used Cameyo, but a long time ago, I used to use a Thinstalled version of a simple explorer loader (I believe it was called Thinloader), which no longer works on newer Windows installs. The benefits to using Thinstall is it automatically writes the registry settings into its sandbox. For PA and WPP to work, you need to know the registry writes manually and then tell the PA / WPP settings file to manually remove those keys after closing the app.

Of course, Thinstall (or Thinapp) is a very expensive program!

Also, don't forget some TPFC favorites like JauntePE and yaP.

[tproli]

My thoughts:

1 - use the developers' portable version if available. I think portable packs are rather for people who don't have enough knowledge about these applications or don't have time to dive deeper into portables. Or they simply prefer a ready-made system (launcher, update, etc) instead of making their own.

2 - I don't think there is much difference

3 - Some portable leave some junk behind (empty directories or registry keys, files in %temp%, etc) and a launcher can clean up properly.

4 - I have some portables that are made with ThinApp/Spoon. Why? Monster applications (M$, Ad0be, etc) are almost impossible to portablize the oldschool way (too many reg entries, too many MBs to move, system-wide changes, etc). And they run in user mode so no admin right is needed - this is a huge benefit when you have no admin rights. So they are no evil imo

[webfork]

if a developer already offers a working and authentic portable version of his/her product, what's the point of PA or WPP creating their own packages?

Generally consolidation, ease of marketing, and simplicity; most users don't want to download a ton of stuff, extract with 7-zip or Universal Extractor, and then add a config file. For folks that are getting started on this topic, I generally point them to PA or WPP. International users will probably prefer WPP (Spanish and Portuguese visitors can probably loosely navigate the Italian ... that's a huge population), but I've seen some moves toward mulch-language support on PA so that may change. Not mentioning all their press, PortableApps is clearly the face of portable software if you just look at their download numbers.

Which portable version should I trust: PA's, WPP's or the developer's? The most stealth? The official, developer-made release?

In terms of trust meaning what can you really rely upon, I'd say the developer version. That's because ultimately you're adding additional variables when working with a non-developer wrapper. However, there are often additional features that WPP and PA add in there that might make it worth your while to take that chance such as extra goodies like 32/64 bit switching or stealth status.

Is one better than the other?

I've had good and bad experiences with both. I somewhat prefer PA's programs as they tend to get updated more frequently and they seem to create relationships with projects/developers. I prefer WPP's launcher.

The only serious difference is licensing: I am a fan of the GPL and that's what PA uses.

what else, beyond those aforementioned features, can I benefit from using the launchers?

Auto-updating. It's useful when you get above 15 often-used programs and manually updating gets annoying. However, I've have had a lot of problems getting the launchers to work right unless you have the directory structure correct.

Cameyo- or ThinInstall

Don't think Cameyo is legal. As freakazoid pointed out, Thinstall is way too expensive and as far as I know against the license to distribute outside an organization.

[Danix]

The only serious difference is licensing: I am a fan of the GPL and that's what PA uses.

Hi webfork,
If you have a look on our site at "License Agreement" at point 3 you can read:

"General license guidelines and copyright"
The project collects documents, scripts, ideas and material protected by author's rights and software released under different licenses. Every component, program, launcher, configuration (.xml .ini) and documentation file is subject to its own license and copyrighted by respective authors. Materials and software created by winPenPack Team, except where indicated, are released under GNU General Public License. X-Launcher and winPenPack launcher, original works of Development Team and integrated parts of winPenPack, are released under GNU General Public License. On X-Software, the program associated to the launcher is property of its own author, winPenPack just portabilizes it, and is covered by its own license. The Portable Software, included in winPenPack collections or indicated in the download section of website, are property of their authors and are covered by their own licenses. The documentation and all website contents, except where indicated, are released under Creative Commons License (Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0).

It's quite clear winPenPack Project is under GPL too.

I somewhat prefer PA's programs as they tend to get updated more frequently and they seem to create relationships with projects/developers.

Regarding relationships with projects/developers, please have a look at this link where we putted in evidence many existing collaborations between wPP Project and software developers. Other important relationships are work in progress.

For your info we are "Official collaborators" also with "Apache OpenOffice" project.
Please have a look at link, link, link.

[webfork]

except where indicated, are released under GNU General Public License. X-Launcher and winPenPack launcher

I actually didn't realize that only your launcher was not under the GPL. I realize we've already talked about this, but why are you using a separate license for your launcher than everything else on your site?

where we putted in evidence many existing collaborations between wPP Project and software developers ... other important relationships are work in progress.

Great to see -- thanks for the update

[JohnTHaller]

If you're curious about some of the benefits of PortableApps.com Format and PortableApps.com Installers, we have a breakdown here:
http://portableapps.com/about/what_is_a ... app#whypaf

The basic advantages of PA.c Format apps over zipped portable apps of interest to most users are smaller download size (saves time and money), easier upgrades (no need to manually remove/move files), easier backups (data in a single consistent location), tamper prevention (self CRC checks and digital signatures), etc. Additionally, apps must be what we call 'fully portable' to be available on PA.c: equivalent to 'stealth' plus path portablization on PFC. You get those benefits whether or not you use the PortableApps.com Platform. If you use PA.c Format apps in conjunction with the PA.c Platform, you also get access to easy installs with the built-in app store and one-click updates with the automatic updater.

Some people prefer the all-in-one approach. Some people prefer the bare metal approach and aren't concerned with leaving traces behind and having some settings break as paths change. And some people mix and match, either using the PA.c Platform with both PA.c Format apps and zipped apps (it works with both), or launching their apps manually in Explorer and just firing up the PA.c Platform to update or add new PA.c Format apps. It's a matter of personal preference and what works best for your workflow.

Hope that helps a bit.

[freakazoid]

Don't think Cameyo is legal.

Haven't tried Cameyo, but it appears to be free:
http://www.cameyo.com/app-virtualization-products

[joby_toss]

Cameyo itself is "free" (it's just a fancy .sfx maker). But the authors are distributing illegal packages that aren't even portable!

I wish someone would delete every reference to Cameyo from TPFC!

[webfork]

I wish someone would delete every reference to Cameyo from TPFC!

Actually, a quick look around some sites seems to indicate that we're the only ones asking if they're illegal including LifeHacker, MakeUseOf, and FreewareGenius.

As mentioned before, I don't think it's legal so I'm glad to make that clear to visitors.

[freakazoid]

I didn't even know that Cameyo offered pre-packaged apps.

I was referring to the virtualization software itself. That part should be legal, right?

[joby_toss]

Does it really matter? Will you support these developers?

[webfork]

I was referring to the virtualization software itself. That part should be legal, right?

Does it really matter? Will you support these developers?

I'm not a lawyer, but the only seemingly illegal thing at this stage is the redistribution of software in a way that looks very incompatible with the license. Putting joby's thoughts another way: assuming we're right and their project is doing something that could get it shut down, Cameyo doesn't seem like a platform I'd want to spend time and energy on.

[Taf]

except where indicated, are released under GNU General Public License. X-Launcher and winPenPack launcher
I actually didn't realize that only your launcher was not under the GPL.

Why "was not"? All our launchers ARE under GPL.

...but why are you using a separate license for your launcher than everything else on your site?

Quite easy to explain! Whole wPP project is under GPL but all portable/made portable programs collected in our suite and/or site have their own licenses and must be respected. We can't modify them!

[webfork]

Why "was not"? All our launchers ARE under GPL.

Some possible confusion here. This site refers to "Launchers" as the programs like PStart and your Net Menu. It is the Net Menu license that I'm asking about.

...but why are you using a separate license for your launcher than everything else on your site?

Whole wPP project is under GPL but all portable/made portable programs collected in our suite and/or site have their own licenses and must be respected. We can't modify them!

Can you modify the Net Menu program's license?
http://www.winpenpack.com/en/download.php?view.1303

Licenza: winPenPack License Agreement