I am a first-time poster here. I have used portable apps for quite a while, and I increasingly use them on my desktop machine, to avoid dealing with the hassles of uninstalling or conflicts with other software. I am always on the lookout for great new portable apps. The Portableapps.com web site is a real gold mine.
However, I wish I understood portability better. From what I gather, there are various "degrees" of portability, and this seems to have something to do with whether the program writes temporary files to disc or makes temporary alterations to the registry, or whatever. But I don't really get the big picture here.
For example, I have used Irfanview for a long time, and value it as a program I don't have to "install." Yet I now see that Smithtech offers a "portable" version of Irfanview. So I wonder: How is it "more portable" than Irfanview already is?
I guess what I need is a good tutorial on portable apps, and what makes them portable, or very portable, or super portable. Can anyone suggest a good tutorial and point me to it? It would help me make better use of these great portable apps.
Many thanks, in advance.
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
This isn't a tutorial but hopefully it helps
What is a portable app?
PortableApps.com Advocate
I use IrfanView too and have done for a very long time. What makes it portable is that it stores its settings in "i_view32.ini" in the same directory as the IrfanView executable.
If they had permission, PortableApps.com could make a "portable" version of it (of course it's already portable), but it would be in the special PortableApps format, which is consistent for all applications featured here. This leads to consistent behavior for things like backing-up user data, updating applications and integration with the PortableApps menu.
In other words, PortableApps does more than just take an app and make it store its settings in a file. It standardizes the approach, and makes it very convenience for an end-user to deal with in a predictable way.
Another common term you might come across is apps that are "Stealth", which basically describe applications that leave no traces themselves that they have ever been run on a particular system (meaning no temporary files, settings, registry entries stored on the host system). However, Windows itself stores certain information about applications, most obvious are things like "most recently run" so its almost impossible to get a true "stealth" app. Besides which, for most everyday use a standard "portable" app should be more than adequate for a user's needs.
Some apps don't store their settings in files, and don't have that ability built-into them as part of the options, so in those cases you have to trick the app somehow to make it think that it's writing to the Registry (where it would otherwise typically store its settings). This is another job of the PortableApps format, but you might consider these apps "less portable" if you're talking about a scale of portabilitiness.
In general for an app to be considered portable, it shouldn't be tethered to one machine (which typically implies entries in the system Registry), meaning that you should be able to copy it from one computer to another and it runs. In addition, it shouldn't leave any semi-permanent traces behind, which implies that it should store settings with the application itself (typically in a file) and that it should clean up/remove any temporary files it creates during use.
HTH
I am grateful to both horusofoz and darkbee for your kind responses to my question.
Horusofoz -- yes, I have read the "What is a Portable App?" page on this site, and it was helpful. Still, I would like to learn a bit more about how portables differ from installed apps, particularly in terms of how they change things either permanently, semi-permanently, or not at all on my hard disc. It would be nice to know which apps make which kinds of changes. I'm only a medium-level computer savvy person, but it would be nice to find a tutorial somewhere that describes the mechanisms in lay terms.
Darkbee -- You discussion of portables is very helpful to me. It gives me more perspective than I had before. I'll still try to find out more though.
I like portables because I use lots and lots of apps for my various hobbies. I hate having to install lots of software, and then go through the drudge of trying to uninstall, without leaving all sorts of garbage behind. Most portables seem to come off pretty cleanly, but I have no clue as to what remnants might be left behind in the registry. It would be great to know how to identify which portables leave the least garbage behind after removal.
Knowing more might help me choose which versions to use. In the Irfanview example, the original is "portable." Yet Techsmith has released a "portable" version of it. I'd really like to know how it differs from the original. I did email him, but didn't get a response.
Anyway, thanks again for your help. What you guys have told me will make it easier to learn more about this field.
I doubt there is much difference between SmithTech's portable IrfanView and the original. All they've done is repackage it with their launcher. You may get more information e-mailing SmithTech than e-mailing Irfan - he probably had no part in the repackaging except to give permission.
Yes, in fact it WAS SmithTech that I emailed, and he did not respond. Of course, it has only been a few days since I sent it, and perhaps he will eventually have time to comment.
I was wondering why someone would go through the trouble of making a portable version of a program that was already portable, unless he thought his version offered some sort of advantage over the other.
All part of the learning process!
Thanks, again, for taking time to help me out.
It's for the some of the reasons I stated above. Many of the programs on offer here are already inherently portable, but repackaging them brings you the convenience of consistency. They all have the same folder structure and the settings are all stored in the same place (the "Data" folder). This just makes things much easier particularly for novice users who don't want to know, or care about where things are being saved but do care about making sure they get backed up.
PortableApps apps are created by using a "launcher" program that actually launches the original app but acts like a sandbox, making sure settings get directed to the right place (if your drive letter on your flash drive changes for example), and also that any temporary files/settings written to the host computer are cleaned up after the original app's use.
It's a simple but elegant solution to making sure all your portable apps behave the same way, and work the same everywhere you go. Of course, there's nothing to stop you using non-PortableApps, portable apps (like IrfanView) together with PortableApp's apps, I do. However, the biggest convenience for me is the ease with which I can update PortableApps' apps, I simply install over the top, not worrying about if settings will be lost. with Non-PortableApp's apps I have to take greater care.
John Haller the originator of PortableApps will be about to explain the advantages of repackaging a lot better than I can, but don't doubt that there are advantages.
I think you can learn a lot looking at the script instructions and basic launcher template under Make Your Own (on the SmithTech site). There seems to be support for custom (env?) variables and paths, custom INI location, and backup/restore/cleanup of registry entries, files and folders.
IrfanView is portable to begin with - I'm sure repackaging was simple (in other words doesn't use most of these features). If you're ambitious (more ambitious than I) you could download the SmithTech portable IrfanView and study its .nsi file.
Thanks once again to darkbee and KevinM.
Now this is beginning to make a lot more sense to me. I can certainly understand the value of having a common approach to portability, so that all (or at least most) of my portables would behave the same way.
As suggested, I will have to dig in myself and look at some of these files --- and perhaps play with making a portable myself.
Just what I need --- another new hobby! But I really enjoy this sort of thing, so I'm sure I'll go ahead and do it.
Thanks a lot for the encouragement.