Hi,
I have a Dell mini9 and trying to find solution for installing my apps on USB, SD card and external HD.
For now I'm using portableapps and really like it.
But some apps are not opensource and cannot be formatted to be portable.
I'm wondering is it possible to use regular apps but install them on external HD?
for example: Pinnacle Studio or other big apps?
Also is SD card faster and or more reliable than USB key?
Thanks
Visit the Community page
Join our forums
Subscribe to our email newsletter
Subscribe with RSS
Follow us on BlueSky
Follow us on Facebook
Follow us on LinkedIn
Follow us on Mastodon
Follow us on Twitter
Hello, I had on occasion problems with this forum, because the help which expects somebody is not given. Either one gets no answer or is expelled to another side. Therefore, I use a menu what is not, indeed, OpenSource, but simply really. One can instal there directly programs and one has them on HDD or USB-Key. It means Ceedo.
Roland Brem
Zwickau, Germany
Ceedo has some big limitations. For starters, it costs $39 (plus another $10 if you want a backup utility) and may or may not work with the software you want to carry with you... and if it does, the app isn't optimized for portability (size and configuration settings). Most of the apps in their app directory that are supposed to work without changes are out of date by several versions. Also, it won't work with most of the big apps that people want to be portable (Microsoft Office, Photoshop, etc). And, as mentioned, it's closed source / proprietary.
r.brem, I think your complaint about requests is a little unjustified. I only see a couple requests for apps from you. Blackbird is basically Firefox with some advertising built in, so, understandably, none of the developers are interested in it. And Sockso is a media server, so it's not that useful portably (I just replied in that topic in case you miss this). Remember that just because you want something portable doesn't mean that a developer may agree with the assessment and be willing to volunteer their personal time. Fear not, though, as we will be providing tools in the next few weeks that'll allow you to do it yourself (without writing any code at all) for those who are interested and publish the configuration for others to use, though. They'll be open source and free, of course.
Sometimes, the impossible can become possible, if you're awesome!
It is a pity that one does not get a lot of help here. I am up so to many forums go where also for certainly programs no Support is given, indeed, nevertheless, a help is offered. Sorry for my bad English, i'm a german people.
Roland Brem
Zwickau, Germany
1. USB's are usually faster than SDs. I'd be surprised to see a SD card beat an USB in speed.
2. It is possible to make them non open source applications portable but not legally.
3. Yes you can just install regular apps on your HD, but.. the app will store it's settings in the computer. Lets say you install the regular edition of FF on your HD, and you run it, then install an add-on. That add-on will disappear when you move to a different computer.
4. On the forums, sometimes people make launchers (Executable that makes an application portable), and posts that for download. That is not illegal because the app does not contain the actual non-OSS software. But you'd have to get the actual app and move it into the right folder.
3. Usually there are no legal issues with portabilizing closed source freeware.
Sometimes there are with open source.
There's really no big difference except that when source is open one can be assure that portabilization is correct in all use cases.
"Those people who think they know everything are a great annoyance to those of us who do." Asimov
3. Usually there are no legal issues with portabilizing closed source freeware
for personal use.
Don't forget that limitation.
Ed
No, I meant for any use. I made a bit more detailed answer to JTH's post slightly below.
"Those people who think they know everything are a great annoyance to those of us who do." Asimov
There's a huge difference when it comes to repackaging or modification and redistribution. Nearly all open source licenses let you. Nearly none of the freeware licenses do. And if it doesn't specifically say you can redistribute modifications or repackage it, you can't.
Sometimes, the impossible can become possible, if you're awesome!
I use mostly closed source freeware and for some time already I read the licenses and I disagree with you here. Good majority of freeware created by independent developers and small companies can be distributed freely, usually any modifications are permited, in some other cases only decompilation etc. are excluded, which doesn't matter much.
Open source programs indeed have small edge in such cases, here really nearly all programs can be distributed with modifications.
Big companies almost always have more restrictive licenses.
But open source programs created by big companies is usually protected too, so here's no difference.
Now what if the license disallows redistribution/modifications? You can contact the author. I'm a side developer of some software bundle. Rather big one. Up to now only 1 freeware company refused to let us use their software. And most of GPL authors.
When it comes to portabilize stuff, GPL authors refusing to bundle their software with closed source stuff are obviously much smaller issue than freeware companies refusing to do anything, but it significantly limits the technologies that one can use.
No. It might be the case with some license formulations, but when some things aren't prohibited, you are allowed to do them.
"Those people who think they know everything are a great annoyance to those of us who do." Asimov
Copyright law says something very different. You aren't even allowed to redistribute an unaltered copy of any software at all, including freeware, without EXPLICIT permission. Many freeware licenses give you permission to redistribute unaltered binary installers.
Here's a quick rundown of the top 20 packages at Download.com and if repackaging/portablization is permitted by their license:
1. AVG - No (forbidden in EULA)
2. Avira Antivir Personal - No (forbidden in EULA)
3. Ad-Aware - No (forbidden in EULA)
4. LimeWire - Yes (under the GPL, but you must recompile and not use the Limewire name or trademarks)
5. Avast - No (forbidden in EULA)
6. Orbit Downloader - No (forbidden in EULA)
7. Malwarebytes Anti-Malware - No (license says you can modify it if you change the name and don't use their trademarks if you have the source code but they do not provide the source code)
8. WinRAR - No (but you can distribute unRar command line only)
9. YouTube Downloader - No (no license included, so you must contact the publisher)
10. Camfrog Video Chat - No (forbidden in EULA)
Sometimes, the impossible can become possible, if you're awesome!
In theory, what's not explicitly allowed is not permitted, but in software practice it's the opposite. All licenses that I've seen contain a sentence like "You're allowed to install and use our program". "and use" is the key part. This sentence alone allows any kind of use including modifications and redistribution. Then usually come either definition of what do they mean by "use" or what practices are disallowed.
(Hope that the words above describe correctly what I mean, I don't know English perfectly and when talking about law nuances matter)
You know you can prove anything with a good pick. You're isn't good, it's actually very bad.
1. AVG states that "unauthorized distribution" is illegal, which clearly means "call us if you want to do it".
2. Avira is not free. It's a 30-day trial.
7. Malwarebytes. Did you ask them for sources? And even if they don't give them, it's still easy to remove trademarks with hex editor+PE resource editor. I bet that it takes less time than with open source Firefox.
8. WinRAR isn't free.
9. There is license in the installer. Creative commons/GPL. BTW they violate GPL by not attaching a copy of the license.
I'm pretty sure I could find a nicely and naturally sounding list of top 10 freeware picks, from which almost all (if not all) let you modify them, but It's not worth my time.
I would gladly see a well done comparison, but I don't think that such exists and because it takes a lot of time, I won't make one and don't expect you to do so.
Our experiences with freeware are different (as well as laws under we live) and I'm afraid we won't get to agreement here.
"Those people who think they know everything are a great annoyance to those of us who do." Asimov
That's not the way the laws are written in the United States. Nor in most of the other countries that have agreed to the Universal Copyright Convention to my knowledge. Use does not mean modify and redistribute. Any more than you buying a book gives you the right to modify it and make copies of it and redistribute it. If you're interpreting "use" to mean "do whatever you want" as you're stating, I can pretty much guarantee what you're doing is illegal in any first-world country.
Sometimes, the impossible can become possible, if you're awesome!
Merriam-Webster:
1 a: the act or practice of employing something : employment , application b: the fact or state of being used c: a method or manner of employing or applying something
2 a (1): habitual or customary usage (2): an individual habit or group custom b: a liturgical form or observance ; especially : a liturgy having modifications peculiar to a local church or religious order
3 a: the privilege or benefit of using something b: the ability or power to use something (as a limb or faculty) c: the legal enjoyment of property that consists in its employment, occupation, exercise, or practice
4 a: a particular service or end b: the quality of being suitable for employment c: good 2b d: the occasion or need to employ
5 a: the benefit in law of one or more persons ; specifically : the benefit or profit of property established in one other than the legal possessor b: a legal arrangement by which such benefits and profits are so established6: a favorable attitude : liking
Yes, modification and redistribution fit in here.
When I buy a book in my country, I'm not handed a license that says I can use it w/out further restrictions. I don't get any license. I don't know how is it, I guess there's some separate law that specifies kind of defaults.
"Those people who think they know everything are a great annoyance to those of us who do." Asimov
Then I'd just suggest you ask a lawyer. I did. And I'm basing my response on that. You can't repackage/modify/redistribute ANY software without permission. Period.
Most open source licenses give you the ability to do all three. Most freeware licenses give you the right to redistribute but specifically deny the right to repackage/modify. Some freeware may not talk about repackaging or modifying, in which case you have to ask first.
Sometimes, the impossible can become possible, if you're awesome!
I did too. These are my friend's words (except for the dictionary quote ;)), otherwise I wouldn't talk about such specific things, I don't know law well. Possibly what you're talking about is US-only. Here we have some rules in copyright law that treat software in a special manner too.
Or maybe that's just not well defined.
"Those people who think they know everything are a great annoyance to those of us who do." Asimov
Sorry, but without explicit written permission it's NOT permitted to redistribute a modified piece of software. You might want to bend it towards I change it and give it away to everyone because you want to but tbh an opinion as yours is one of the reasons of such restricted EULA's.
Simple put, only if the license permits redistributing of changed software you can, else you may not. A license is for setting the rules of what you may or may not do. To take it so far as well it's not explicit written in the ELUA so I may is the world up-side-down.
I bet most ELUA's don't explicit forbid you printing and selling wallpaper for your house from the UI of the software, that doesn't mean you are allowed to do that. Copyright is for the copyright holder and a program falls under copyright.