Please avoid using *.MSI technology for installation of "production" C.I.S.

Please avoid using *.MSI technology for installation of any production release, and continue to use “setup.exe”

I learnt today that MSI has caused grief for some users of CIS4 Beta.
I am sorry for them, but I also think grief is “par for course” for any Beta product user.

It is less acceptable to cause grief to less technical users of “commercial release” software.
Many of them probably do not know the difference between a BSOD and a Low Memory pop-up.

I am violently antagonistic to MSI technology - even if it installs without error.

I was given a second-hand Laptop and horrified to discover tons of *.MSI rubbish.
One of the worst offenders was Windows Live Messenger.
This had been through many updates, and every update came with a new and larger MSI.
On every update the latest MSI had the ability to replace the previous executable code,
but STUPIDLY left all the old MSI in situ.

For every 1 GB of executable code that comes out of MSI, there is 1 GB of redundant MSI that has to be retained.
There may be exceptions to this, but in my experience if the MSI is deleted then the executable code cannot be un-installed or upgraded.
ALSO if I did not come along afterwards and clean-up the previous version MSI there would be another 7 GB of junk cluttering my drive and bloating my Disc backup images.

I put a lot of effort into reducing the used space on C:\ from 9 GB down to 5.6 GB.
I would hate it if Comodo undid what I have achieved


Agree totally with both reasons for setup.exe usage instead of an MSIexec installer!
It’s foolproof. :-TU :-TU
Sorcerer 8)

I’m not an expert in this matter, so I’ll have to ask:
Doesn’t Vista/7 save copies of all previously installed versions in the WINSXS folder anyway, regardless of the installer being of the .msi or .exe variety?

I use XP Home and do not know whether or not that is true.

But thank you very much for saying that.
My eldest son often suggests it is time I installed Windows 7,
and your statement is now added it to my list of arguments against it ! ! !


It is in fact a very smart feature, as Windows will automatically select the version that is most compatible for a specific application. But, as I said before, I don’t know the impact this has on the INSTALLER.

Can I make a suggestion?

If you set up a poll with a question that should be answered with a YES or NO answer, you should include those as a selectable choice.

The poll, as it currently stands, can only be satisfactorily answered by those who agree with you, thereby rendering it redundant. For example, which of the available choices should I select if I wanted Comodo to continue using MSI installers? ??? 88)

For the record, I would like to see EXE installers or both EXE and MSI offered.

Ewen :slight_smile:

+1 I agree with Ewen I would like to see both MSI and EXE installers.

Ewen and DSP

Happy to oblige.