Hi everyone!
I like Portable Apps very much, and most of my apps are coming from this site. The only problem which hold me from using the MENU from PortableApps is that it is not allowing me to create subfolders in it and organize it better. When I install applications, it puts it in a scrollable list which is ordered alphabetically. The best way would be like this by default, but if a user chooses to have his own structure, he should be allowed to create folders (windows style). For this, I'm using now "Portable Start Menu". If Portable Apps Menu would have this option, I would certainly migrate to it.
Thank you.
Visit the Community page
Join our forums
Subscribe to our email newsletter
Subscribe with RSS
Follow us on Facebook
Follow us on LinkedIn
Follow us on Twitter
Follow us on Mastodon
Follow us on BlueSky
This has been requested many times; search around and you'll find a lot.
Categorisation is something which is due in approximately the 2.0 release, due when it gets here. There are lots of other, more important business negotiations, site developments, hosting managements, etc. things which need doing.
In the meantime, there is a test release which allows you to put apps at the top or bottom of the list; 1.6 Pre-Release 0.
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
A bold statement, considering this is open source and the R34 mod, also open source, has had folders for a year and a half. An individual clever in programming (which I am not) should be able to look at the source code of the R34 menu and the official menu and add the feature, no? I mean, how big a deal is it, really? As a feature it's more often requested than any other feature, and I'd say more often requested than updated apps as well, though most people know better.
Just an observation, of course. If it bothered me, I'd be using the R34 menu, or perhaps another, or maybe try my hand at altering the latest menu, despite my empty experience in programming. And of course:
This is more than sufficient for my flash drive. At home, I've still got R34, but I have a lot more portable applications and thus need the folders. But I rarely use it; shortcuts to the ones I use the most are on the desktop, along with a shortcut to the menu to call the rest if need be.
A proper implementation is not as easy. Also remember that John really does have far too much to do.
For myself, when I was using PortableApps.com applications [more] (now I've got my own laptop), I used Command Prompt Portable with doskey macros like "vi" for gVim Portable and "ff" for Firefox.
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
Yeah, I know he stays pretty busy with various things.
Proper, you say; implying the R34 implementation of folders is improper? A .pafdata file in each AppnamePortable folder telling it which folder to put it in seems kind of smart. Compare that to the official menu which will have a list of apps to hide, but this is in the menu's folder, not the apps'. So what happens if I hide an app and then delete the app? Does the menu remove the now erroneous entry? Having this setting almost goes against the PA format in having information for apps outside of their folder. The .pafdata idea is smart because if you remove the app, all reference to it is gone as well, and presumably this is cleaner.
The .pafdata file could be used to implement features people may like but not really demand. Like say we want certain apps' names bold, or in a certain color. This could be done through the GUI of the menu, or it could be done by adding lines to the .pafdata (which is just plain text). For example "fontface=bold" and "fontcolor=green" would make the appropriate changes. PAP seems to scan \PortableApps and look in folders under it (but no further), collect the apps as listed, and check them against the hidden apps, and display what's left. R34 seems to do that, plus for each app, check the .pafdata file and do a little more. I mean, it's looking in the folder anyway for .exe files, stopping off at the .pafdata file doesn't seem a big stretch. But again, I'm not a programmer... but this is the first I've heard that the folders aren't a proper implementation.
No, proper as in, thought out, considered, planned from a visual accessible, and intuitive point of view.
For example, when you expand a folder, does the content replace the menu, like the ipod UI, or windows explorer main pane, or does it expand in-line, like the vista start menu, or geek menu currently does?
Do you allow for sub-folders and a hierarchical structure? Is that too confusing for most people?
Does the openness state of the menu persist when the menu hides, or does it reappear.
If you do allow sub-foders, what happens when you're opening them in-line and the indent gets deeper and deeper and deeper and you run out of width.
Properly as in "if we're doing this, lets do it properly".
Like most things in software development, there are a lot more issues behind the scenes than most users tend to consider.
In that case it's already proper. Subfolders aren't allowed. It expands in-line, and you can have multiple folders open (with their contents displayed) at a time. Also the open/close status persists when the menu is hidden and unhidden, not sure about when you exit and re-open the menu or not.
Also installing a new app with the menu running doesn't break all the existing folders, like the 1.6 beta does (breaks top/bottom stuck apps). But I suppose that's what beta means.
So I would say the current R34 folder implementation is proper, by your definitions. And you can't really run out of width (interesting idea, though) because you can also rename the apps. I personally take " Portable" off the end of each one.
No, proper as in, thought out, considered, planned from a visual accessible, and intuitive point of view.
For example, when you expand a folder, does the content replace the menu, like the ipod UI, or windows explorer main pane, or does it expand in-line, like the vista start menu, or geek menu currently does?
Like the Start menu does.
Do you allow for sub-folders and a hierarchical structure?
Yes, you allow a hierachy.
Is that too confusing for most people?
No, this isn't too confusing; if it was, MS wouldn't have kept it for the Start menu
Does the openness state of the menu persist when the menu hides, or does it reappear.
No, it hides (like the Windows start menu)
If you do allow sub-foders, what happens when you're opening them in-line and the indent gets deeper and deeper and deeper and you run out of width.
You do the exact same thing as MS Windows does; you switch so the menus open on the other side.
Properly as in "if we're doing this, lets do it properly".
Like most things in software development, there are a lot more issues behind the scenes than most users tend to consider.
Not really, it seems pretty simple to me. Technically it's actually not that difficult.
If you've got any other questions, I'd be happy to answer them for you.
I wasn't trying to ask those questions, I was just pointing out that there were a lot more questions about it than many people would realise at first glance.
Oh, and, you may be interested to know that "like the Start Menu does" is meaningless, since they totally redid how that works between XP and Vista. So, if even Microsoft with their millions of dollars spent on user interface and user experience research can get it wrong (in their opinion, or they would not have changed it) first time, then it can't be that straight forward.
I wasn't trying to ask those questions, I was just pointing out that there were a lot more questions about it than many people would realise at first glance.
Ah! Sorry I misunderstood!
I still don't see what's so complex about it though (see above!)
Oh, and, you may be interested to know that "like the Start Menu does" is meaningless, since they totally redid how that works between XP and Vista. So, if even Microsoft with their millions of dollars spent on user interface and user experience research can get it wrong (in their opinion, or they would not have changed it) first time, then it can't be that straight forward.
They haven't changed the basic concept though. The user interface did have some relativly minor changes, though Vista does still allow the XP way as an option.
No reason why the portableapps menu can't do the same thing though! Hey - if Microsoft spent sooo much on the research, let's use it!
I prefer too the way of doing the organisation of the apps of the R34, but It would be nice if, instead of filling the main directory of a Papp with strange files, it read the appinfo.ini. maybe like this:
For FFP in the folder "Browsers" inside "Internet" getting shown in bold & green color.