I'll comment on points not covered in my response... On 2010-10-12 8:38 AM, Harold Fuchs wrote: > The following comments apply to Windows only and are things I'd like > to see > > 1. A single installation program, probably a .msi file that the user > downloads and executes. There must be a clear instruction up front > that the user must install the software as an Administrator.
This would also be a first step toward full GPO support, which should be high on the priority list, as that is one lack that prevents many large corporations from rolling it out. So, +10 > The installation process must clearly inform the user, in detail, > about any item that is not inheritable. The information provided must > clearly identify the item in question, must state a user-oriented > reason (no hex codes please!) and, if possible, make suggestions as > to where a newer version can be obtained. Sounds like a lot of work for little gain - and most prefs fully carry-over already... > 5. It must be possible for the user to run the installed software as a > limited (restricted) user. Doesn't that work now? > 6. It must be possible for the installation to be for "this user" (the > installer), "all users" or named users. Same here - I thought the first two already work that way - and I really don't see a need for the third option - does *any* other program provide such an option? > 7. There must be a properly documented procedure for "silent" installation > over a network so that company Admins can install the software for the > company's users. +1 - including fine-grained support for controlling file associations. -- Best regards, Charles -- To unsubscribe, e-mail to [email protected] All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted. List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
