Why the new installer icons are becoming all the same? Isn't it better that each installer icon use the old system where they used to use the original icon!
New: NAPS2 (Feb 24, 2025), Platform 29.5.3 (Jun 27, 2024)
1,100+ portable packages, 1.1 billion downloads
No Ads!, Please donate today
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
They're becoming the same for consistency, and also to avoid confusion between the installer and the main app. Also, more apps nowadays use a special install icon rather than their app's one. Also they show they come from PortableApps.com
I am a Christian and a developer and moderator here.
“A soft answer turns away wrath, but a harsh word stirs up anger.” – Proverbs 15:1
I don't know about that.
Regarding confusion, any body using portable apps is technically comfortable to distinguish between the regular installer and the portable apps one. The installer names includes "portable" and ".paf". and when you launch the installer, you see it says "portableapps.com installer" all over the window.
Also, if some body forgot the name of the application that he wants to install, by just looking at the icons of the installers he saved, he can find it quickly.
also, if you use the portableapps.com icon on all installers, people who don't know about these things will think portableapps.com is the creator of all those applications.
I say people should vote on this issue.
Like Chris said, consistency. Not just with the other portable apps, but regular local apps also use 'installer' icons. Most use standard ones like the standard NSIS or Installshield ones, even Firefox and Thunderbird. It becomes more of an issue on Windows 7 as only the icon is shown in the Windows taskbar. So, you see a Firefox icon in the taskbar... but it's not Firefox, it's the Firefox Portable installer, which can be confusing to users. Even on XP or Vista it can be confusing since you're drawn to the icon in your taskbar and then you read the words and realize it's not the window you want.
Sometimes, the impossible can become possible, if you're awesome!
regarding the confusion with the taskbar thing. that would make sense if you launch the installer like every 5 seconds while using the same application and switching between those two every 2 seconds. but you launch the installer once per install per drive per new version release, which takes forever here anyways. I think it is one of those situations where more harm is done than good. Imagine if all chocolate bars have the same packaging, how boring is that and how difficult it becomes to pick the one you want...I favor the original icons.
Biggest part of the installers nowadays has one of those standard installer icons though, not just our installers. Now you convince the whole world to use fancy packaging for their chocolate bars again
On the other hand, I don't see whats all the fuzz about. Typically you'll run these installers just once, and then you're done with em. And well, since it makes sense for a installer to use a installer icon, plus it makes things more clear for win 7 users, you can count me in favor of the new icons. Aye 
Behold, the DutchLander has arrived.
Grammatical errors are copyrighted.
I'm with JTH and Chris on this one, but it's hardly an issue worth complaining about. Normal users just download the installer, run it, and be done with it. I archive them, so I have a repository at home of all the portable apps I use, and upon opening the folder and seeing all those PA.c logos, it doesn't bother me, because Windows sorts them by title and I can quickly find the ones I want, say, when I put in a clean flash drive and I'd like to load it out.
And you'd think someone like me, doing what I do, would want the original icons. I wouldn't mind them, but it doesn't matter.
Your analogy doesn't translate very well and therefore fails. A better one would be shopping bags, at least in support of Chris's explanation. You're saying you want your shopping bags to list what's inside, and he's saying the bags are just going to have the store's name and logo on them.
Then again, I don't think filehippo.com and download.com should change the logos of files they host to use their own. I wouldn't like that at all. Nor would I appreciate such a site bundling freeware with something like the Google toolbar, even if it were just an optional install. But the software we get from PortableApps.com is modified, in a sense that we want. Also, I can clean up the filenames to just say, e.g. Firefox 3.0.10, no PAF. The PA.c icon would remind me that it's a PortableApp and not the original Firefox (though I have all my portable stuff in a separate folder to avoid such confusion).
I too save the installers on my drive in case I need to install it again.
So I guess I am the only one out here who thinks changing the icons is a bad idea.
what I am going to do now, not only I need to save the original installers, but I also need now to make a backup of the original icons to replace the new icon.
They're alphabetically ordered, so you can find em easily on the off-chance you need em... there's really no need to go through the fuss of changing the icon (especially since they won't work if you do). If you save installers for, say, Firefox or Sunbird or Thunderbird (the local installs) they all use a generic installer icon, too. So, it's nothing really new here.
Sometimes, the impossible can become possible, if you're awesome!
I also save my installers and preferred the application icons. I group all my portable and non portable apps together in folder categories so it was easier picking out the firefox logo when there are more than one portable app in that category.
However, it's a small change on my side to get used to and I fully understand and support the change to a consistent installer logo.
Thanks again for all the developers efforts in giving us portability.
Regards
Paul
well speaking about websites changing logos, did you notice that OpenOffice logo, the one that pops when you first launch the application, it was changed by adding the word "portable" on top of the name and they threw on also that usb logo thing! I wonder if they got permission to mess with it
Of course we did. We would not do so without permission. I believe that it was done in conjunction with OpenOffice.org, the restrictions being: OpenOffice.org wants the same logo to stay there (with minor modifications). PortableApps.com wants the bar at the bottom, the USB disk, and the word "Portable". They get together and create the current logo.
To doubt that we would do that is not very nice really. We do everything very carefully to avoid the slightest possibility of illegality.
I am a Christian and a developer and moderator here.
“A soft answer turns away wrath, but a harsh word stirs up anger.” – Proverbs 15:1
Unlike other sites that illegally package software, violate trademarks and violate open source licenses, we don't do those things. We worked with OpenOffice.org on that splash to combine the branding so it's obvious to an end user that it is a real copy of OpenOffice.org but that it's packaged in a special way.
Sometimes, the impossible can become possible, if you're awesome!
I had a fairly large discussion on this with John back when he initially switched to installers. It had its pros and cons, and it still does. I'll trust his judgment.
I'm not sure how keen I am on it really. But then maybe I'm just grumpy. I certainly think I'll get used to it if you keep churning out great apps with it on
why not both?
For example...
Use the firefox icon with the usb drive instead of the usb drive with the PortableApps.com logo.
Kind of hard to implant but... you did the header thing, why not this?
That would be harder to implement and create an ICO with 4 different sizes at 2 different color depths. And legally it'd have issues (which placing the app logo on a white background does not).
Plus, there's really no reason. Most regular apps use a generic installer icon including Firefox and Thunderbird. It's an installer. You use it once and move on. Soon, most people won't even see them since they'll be using the updater.
Sometimes, the impossible can become possible, if you're awesome!
I knew it would be hard...
I just wanted to know what people think....
why not delete all the application icons from this link and replace them with the new icon!
https://portableapps.com/apps
Alright, you're obviously aware that you've crossed the line into the absurd with this suggestion. Most people download and use an installer once and then delete it. A good chunk of apps use generic installer icons. This includes the local installers for Firefox, Thunderbird and Sunbird. Are you also complaining to Mozilla about this fact and asking them to remove the Firefox logo from their site?
Sometimes, the impossible can become possible, if you're awesome!
don't mind me, i was just being silly. i have no problems with icon thing.
U okay dude? :S
John... I don't comment much (or know you) but I notice you have been getting more ummmm.... aggressive. Am I wrong?
self.path = path if self.path == None else self.path
No offense, but I have also noticed that.
The suggestion was obviously ridiculous and frivolous. John responded fairly softly, I reckon. Comments like that should just not be made.
I am a Christian and a developer and moderator here.
“A soft answer turns away wrath, but a harsh word stirs up anger.” – Proverbs 15:1
The problem is tone. When I went back and read my post it sounded more harsh than funny/sarcastic, which is how it was intended. It wasn't meant to sound mean and I apologize if it came off as such.
Sometimes, the impossible can become possible, if you're awesome!