Graham Shaw has released RiscPkg, a RISC OS package manager. The idea behind package management is relatively simple, but it can hide suprisingly complex details in its aim to ensure a system has the latest versions of software, along with making sure dependent programs are installed, and downloading these easily with an automated installation system.
RISC OS Gets Package Management
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
Join the club.
Maybe Windows will be in there on day (;
Installation shouldn’t be no more complicated (or lengthly in time) than dragging an icon. Package management is not very RISC OSy. Hoping that RISC OS doesn’t become another UNIX just because Linux is popular at the moment.
I couldn’t agree more. Risc OS uses App Dirs. IMO this simple way of managing packages is the way we should be moving forward. Not so much on the server but for desktops at least. Rox (http://rox.sf.net) uses App Dirs and it is very appealing to be able to just drag across apps you want to install or simply delete on file to uninstall. Not even Windows is that simple.
The project I am helping out with is working towards a Linux distribution based around this idea. I invite you to take a look at http://roxos.sunsite.dk if your interested.
App directories are way to complicated for users. They bring into play all sorts of concepts that most users don’t understand:
1) Filesystem hierarchy: Many users have only the vaguest understanding of a hierarchical filesystem. Most don’t understand that there are special directories that mean special things. The user shouldn’t ever need to go outside of their home directory, because that’s frankly about as much as they understand.
2) Drag & Drop: I don’t know what its like on RiscOS, but most Windows users I know do not understand Drag & Drop. Windows just doesn’t use the concept very extensively.
Moreover, application directories are so manual (the user has to do a lot of legwork themselves), and its a lot of work to keep the system updated. Meanwhile, a package manager, in combination with a proper GUI for it, reuses existing concepts. Users are usually comfortable launching programs, and double-clicking on the program they want isn’t a complex task. Keeping the whole system updated can be as easy as clicking a single button (in contrast to the horrendously complex Windows Update!).
Its interesting to note that QNX has a package manager as well. What’s important is having a nice, well-designed package manager front-end.
>I don’t know what its like on RiscOS, but
>most Windows users I know do not understand
>Drag & Drop. Windows just doesn’t use the
>concept very extensively
I haven’t used RiscOS for ages, but I remember that Drag & Drop was used very extensively – IIRC you even dragged an icon of the file from an application to a directory window to save it, instead of the usual dialog box (although I could be wrong and perhaps things have changed since?). If that’s the case, I’d imagine that RiscOS users are probably fairly conditioned to Drag & Drop.
This project is still on? It doesn’t appear to have been updated for almost a year.
Yes we are still going. Guido Schimmels is now project lead. He is currently busy protyping a working system and is hoping to have something to show the world early next year.
I myself haven’t made much progress with the website this year. I’m slowly working to pad it out ready for when we have something that people can try out and help develop.
Most discussion takes place in the mailing lists.
In reply to Rayiner, I do not believe that to be true.
1) The filesystem heirarchy should be simple enough for users to understand and organise how they please. AppDirs if implemented correctly look absolutely no different to a single file.
2) The Drag & Drop concept may be alien to most Windows users but it is still one simple concept that users can userstand and reuse in multiple different situations rather than lots of differing GUIs for doing different tasks. My concern is achieving simplicity and letting the user understand and feel in control of the OS they are using. If this means breaking away from how Windows users are used to doing things then so be it.
I am undecided as to what role package management will play in Rox OS yet, I don’t recall that this has been discussed much yet. I agree though that it is very useful for keeping a system up to date security wise and keeping compatibility issues in check.
>App directories are way to complicated for users.
>1) Filesystem hierarchy
App directories work differently in RISC OS from what you might expect.
An Appdir is immediately recognizable due to its name starting with ‘!’. To open it instead of launching the application you just hold shift when you double click it.
Inside the directory there isn’t really a filesystem hierarchy, but rather some files with defined names:
* ‘!Boot’ is a script that is executed when the application icon is first seen. Normally some paths and run types are set up in there. By explicitly executing the !Boot of an application you can normally change the standard application for supported file types.
* ‘!Run’ is a script that’s exectued when you double click the application directory to launch it.
* ‘!Sprite’ holds the application icons in the Sprite format.
In most cases the main executable is called ‘!RunImage’, but since it’s called from ‘!Run’ that doesn’t really matter. Everything else is up to the programmer.
I don’t see how this is complicated in any way…
>2) Drag & Drop
RISC OS probably has some of the best use of drag & drop in any GUI I know. Like Alex mentioned, you don’t really enter a file path but you drag the file icon from the save box and drop it to the Filer window that represents the directory where you want to save the file.
And I don’t really care if Windows users understand drag & drop or not, because Windows has a very bad user interface in my point of view and one certainly shouldn’t stick to it. Which is why I don’t like it how KDE seems to copy Windows more and more.
Also unlike most other computers I know (apart from an Acorn RiscPC I have an Atari ST, a PC, a BeBox, and a PowerMac) the Acorn came with a very good printed(!) user manual (over 600 pages!) that teaches you quite well how to use the features of RISC OS.
I’m not totally sure if it’s still true for the current RISC OS computers, but I hope so, because that certainly was the best documentation I ever got together with a computer.
An Appdir is immediately recognizable due to its name starting with ‘!’. To open it instead of launching the application you just hold shift when you double click it.
>>>>>>>>>>>
And how is a user supposed to know that intuitively?
I don’t see how this is complicated in any way…
>>>>>>>>>>>>
I wasn’t talking about the complexity of the inside of the app directory, but rather of the filesystem in general. With AppDirs, you have a program, represented as a single file, that you drag into a special “Applications” folder, right? That concept is confusing. Users have to not only understand the concept of a filesystem, but have to understand that certain folders have special meanings to the system. Most computer users don’t understand the filesystem hierarchy. I can’t tell you the number of times I’ve had to help people find files that they’d accidentally saved outside of “My Documents”. Note that both MacOS and Windows have moved away from the general filesystem hierarchy to a “home directory” model. Windows saves stuff in “My Documents” by default, and hides the root directory. MacOS’s file dialog’s UI is somewhat disconnected fromt he FHS, has special icons for “Home” and “Documents” directories, and saves files there by default. Both treat the desktop specially, even though the actual folder representing the desktop is buried somewhere in the directory tree. The whole concept of a hierarchical filesystem is rather abstract for most people, and in Windows Longhorn, it is going to be hidden in favor of a search-oriented view of the filesystem. AppDirs are nice from the point of view of someone familiar with how the filesystem works, but most users (maybe because of Windows, I don’t know) seem to think in terms of applications rather than files. They don’t double-click on a document in a directory to open it, rather they open the program they want to use, and open the document from there. Installing apps should operate in the same manner.
And I don’t really care if Windows users understand drag & drop or not, because Windows has a very bad user interface in my point of view and one certainly shouldn’t stick to it. Which is why I don’t like it how KDE seems to copy Windows more and more.
>>>>>>>>>>>
Unfortunately, Microsoft’s position in the business ensures that people will be more familiar with how the Windows UI works, and will percieve everything else to be harder. Beyond that, I think drag and drop is just such a cumbersome model. Its conceptually elegant, but its a pain to use. It often involves organizing your windows to get the source and target on the screen at once, its not immediately obvious what can be dragged and where it can be dropped, etc. Finding an application file, opening the AppDir folder, getting both on the same screen, and dragging and dropping is so much more time-consuming that double-clicking the application’s icon in a GUI.
Also unlike most other computers I know (apart from an Acorn RiscPC I have an Atari ST, a PC, a BeBox, and a PowerMac) the Acorn came with a very good printed(!) user manual (over 600 pages!) that teaches you quite well how to use the features of RISC OS.
>>>>>>>>>>>
The BeOS user manual was also pretty sweet (I think it was close to 200 pages), but it was still rather technical. I wouldn’t give something like that to my mom to read, for example. Maybe its fine for a product like RiscOS, where the users will likely have some existing computer knowledge, but its not appropriate for a general purpose OS meant for beginning computer users.
“I wasn’t talking about the complexity of the inside of the app directory, but rather of the filesystem in general. With AppDirs, you have a program, represented as a single file, that you drag into a special “Applications” folder, right?”
>>>>>>>>>>
The solution is to create a simple FSH in the first place. Take a look at the FSH being created for Rox OS for example. There is no special “Applications” folder where you must place AppDirs, they can be stuck anywhere you like.
“It often involves organizing your windows to get the source and target on the screen at once, its not immediately obvious what can be dragged and where it can be dropped, etc. Finding an application file, opening the AppDir folder, getting both on the same screen, and dragging and dropping is so much more time-consuming that double-clicking the application’s icon in a GUI.”
>>>>>>>>>
That is correct. That is why with Rox OS we are planning to have your most commonly used storage devices/folders and AppDirs on the taskbar. This means that commonly used applications and storage locations are just a single click away.
“Maybe its fine for a product like RiscOS, where the users will likely have some existing computer knowledge, but its not appropriate for a general purpose OS meant for beginning computer users.”
>>>>>>>>>
I would dispute that. In my personal experience I found that Risc OS was significantly easier to learn than Windows. This was when I had no previous computer experience. This is because Risc OS sticks to a few good concepts such as Drag & Drop and GUI guidelines for applications.
Quite a few times, I have seen users delete folders directly from their harddrive to remove a program instead of using the uninstaller. Or they want to transfer/backup a program, by copying the folders around, and don’t understand why it doesn’t work. Why do you think ms put those “nagscreens” in explorer when you open the windows directory or programs folder?
So, yeah, Rox appdir principle, (or osx bundles), is allot more intuitive for users to manage. It is just a much more simple model to understand, than the “put bunch of critical files there, and there, and there, and there”. Most linux distributions suffer even more from this problem, so here is hoping the roxfiler project takes up more steam in the future 🙂
An Appdir is immediately recognizable due to its name starting with ‘!’. To open it instead of launching the application you just hold shift when you double click it.
>>>>>>>>>>>
And how is a user supposed to know that intuitively?
They don’t need to know that. The ordinary user doesn’t or shouldn’t need to look inside the AppDir.
With AppDirs, you have a program, represented as a single file, that you drag into a special “Applications” folder, right? That concept is confusing. Users have to not only understand the concept of a filesystem, but have to understand that certain folders have special meanings to the system.
As “hailstorm” says, you can put them anywhere you like but you’d probably want to drop new applications in a folder set aside for them. Since you would actually drop the new AppDir into the folder then you are more likely to remember where you put it!
They don’t double-click on a document in a directory to open it, rather they open the program they want to use, and open the document from there. Installing apps should operate in the same manner.
Well, the problem with your observation is that it isn’t necessarily true for a filer-based system with pervasive drag-and-drop. On such a system, it’s easier to use the filer to locate documents rather than open an application and use some keyhole-filer to find them.
Finding an application file, opening the AppDir folder, getting both on the same screen, and dragging and dropping is so much more time-consuming that double-clicking the application’s icon in a GUI.
The point about sources and destinations is a good one but it need not apply to the issue of loading documents either on RISC OS or when using ROX Filer. Just click the application file as usual.
The people who delete a folder from “Program Files” are generally intermediate users, who know what “Program Files” is, but don’t know about the registry. Computer newbies generally aren’t even aware of Program Files. They don’t know or care where the app lives, or how it gets there, as long as there is a link in the Start Menu or Desktop. And I hold that using a simple application to add/remove programs is a whole lot simpler than introducing the concept of app-dirs, and making users understand the FHS.
Thats the whole point though! If programs were stored as AppDirs then you wouldn’t have such curious types you describe as ‘intermediate users’ deleting programs from the Programs Files folder and having the system clogged up with left over registry entries. Why should we be designing we be designing an OS around the lowest common denominator?
As davidb points out “Since you would actually drop the new AppDir into the folder then you are more likely to remember where you put it!” I do not believe that most people are too stupid to grasp such a concept. Too lazy maybe, but then I don’t really care for such people.
I think that making the OS opaque to people who don’t want to deal with the guts is a worthy goal. Moreover, I hold that a package manager is easier to deal with, when you take into account maintainence issues, especially in an enterprise environment with thousands of machines. But maybe that’s a difference in taste.
However, my comment was specifically in response to Luke M. who made the comparison to Linux. Many people *are* aiming Linux at the lowest common denominator, so its not really a fair comparison if you admit that the AppDirs method is too complex for that segment. Lindows’s Click & Run, for example is a real advancement for the type of user that is only comfortable tooling around in Word and on the internet.
PS> A hierarchical FS is a rather abstract concept. Unfortunately, most people don’t handle abstraction very well at all. That’s why the Mac goes to such great lengths to eliminate abstraction and metaphors. To a Mac user, a Finder window isn’t an abstract view into a folder somewhere in the FHS, it *is* the folder. An icon doesn’t represent a program, it *is* the program. Also, hierarchies are kept to a minimum — that’s why iTunes displays a flat list, why the MacOS HIG discourages using sub-menus, and why the OS X file dialog uses a list of important folders (Home, Documents, etc) as the primary UI feature.
A hierarchical FS is a rather abstract concept. Unfortunately, most people don’t handle abstraction very well at all.
I agree, I welcome the death of files and the usage of the silly file abstraction for everything in the universe (sockets, memory, devices, cheese…)
I think that making the OS opaque to people who don’t want to deal with the guts is a worthy goal.
The problem here is that OSs are far too complex and so we have to make the interface opaque to give us poor humans a chance at being able to cope. I think it would be better to simplify the way code is dealt with on the system and investigate alternatives to the whole ‘OS’ thing. This would mean discarding our old assumptions and getting back to the “what do we want a computer for, anyway?” question.
I would prefer a transparent system. Yes, there would be a good user interface but it wouldn’t be near the complexity of Windows for example and probably nothing like it at all. And this human interface would map nicely to the realites. But hardware is too complex, and this demands the software be complex. And we have in our minds the felling that we need to be compatible with ’70s software and over-engineered industry standards and we have to produce a general solution. It doesn’t need to be this way.
To me knowing how to drag and drop an icon into a folder to install, then simply delete it to uninstall, is a hell of lot more intuitive and simple than any package management system.
You don’t need to learn the details of the file system, you just need to know how to make a directory and drag an icon into it. Even the most computer illiterate Windows users I know have their documents sorted into folders, so they could easily learn to do the same with apps.
For anyone using RISC OS it would be even more obvious, you need to know how to drag and drop and use the file manager to open/save files. IMO that’s much more logical and elegant than having a single window mini filemanager open inside the app.
I imagine most users could find their apps a hell of a lot faster if they had placed them somewhere themselves. It’s painful to see people hunting for an app in a jumbled Start menu that’s cluttered with all the games and shareware crap they’ve installed. I’ve seen some Start menus that fill more than 4 screens, mainly because of all the left over junk that hasn’t been removed by uninstallers. Then there’s the way some apps put icons in the top level of the Start menu, some in a folder with the apps name and some buried in a sub-folder of a folder with the companies name.
Any users who can happily deal with everyday Windows inelegance is capable of learning to drag and drop an icon.
The gulf between computers understanding us, is greater than us understanding the computer.