Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 15th Dec 2008 15:10 UTC
Editorial states: "Microsoft (or a really smart ISV) should build a full application manager for Windows, similar to what most Linux distributions do today." Most Windows applications come with their own distinctive updating mechanism (much like Mac OS X), instead of having a centralised updating location like most Linux distributions offer. While it certainly wouldn't be harmful for Windows to gain such a feature - the question remains: isn't it time we rethink program installation and management altogether?
Thread beginning with comment 340332
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Wrong question
by Soulbender on Mon 15th Dec 2008 16:12 UTC
Member since:

"Does Windows need a package manager" is not a relevant question. Personally I don't much like how software management work on Windows but hey, I've made my choice not to use Windows. Obviously what there is is sufficient to keep most people happy so far. The question is if enough people who uses Windows want one. If you build it they will come, providing there's a need for what you built. Don't talk about it, code it.

You could even argue that Windows does have one already, Windows Installer. Granted it doesn't handle automatic updates and such but neither does Slackware's package system.

Reply Score: 3