I was wondering that it would be a bandwidth saver if we could check for updates both remotely and locally:
I have some colleagues in the company I work for, and we all use and enjoy having such nice and handy portable apps.
If there are new packages, they would be downloaded to a local repository first, then updated to the flash drive. Latter, other guys would have most of the updated packages already available locally.
Thanks for all that good stuff.
Francisco
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
who could be the one who checks for updates on theirs, and then sends out to everyone an attachment that has the new version?
It saves from everyone going out of the network I suppose, and keeps it all internal, except for that IT person.
Is external network bandwith that much different/expensive for the odd-month of updates?
Don't be an uberPr∅. They are stinky.
I thought on something automatic, a new functionality to the platform.
First, the platform checks for updates remotely. Then checks if the package is available locally. If it isn't, if first downloads to a previously configured folder (shared, of course), and then installs it.
Too weird?
Why would there be a local update and not a remote update package? About the only way that could happen is if you worked at PortableApps headquarters.Oh, I see now. You want it to check to see if you've already downloaded the update. I don't know about you, but I generally install updates as soon as I download them. My only exception is Portable Apps downloaded at home on my Mac and run at school the next day.
"Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results." - Albert Einstein
My use of Google indicates that I am insane.
The idea is to save bandwidth for several PortableApps lovers at the same location (company, school, whatever).
The installer has to be downloaded to a temporary folder, anyway. It would be just a matter of choosing that folder to a network shared folder, and not to delete the installer after its job is done. The cleanup of that folder could be manual, at first, just not to impact too much on the existing code, but in the future it could keep only recent versions
I think this is an excellent idea. But I wouldn't go as far as your last version of it.
Rather one of two options:
1. Make the download URL adjustable. A use could configure their apps to download from the remote site or a local site.
2. A user could configure their apps to download from a local site and if not available then to check the remote site.
I think the latter option could get tricky but the first one should certainly be doable and would save a lot of band width.
Ed
I agree, that would be a nice feature.
In my case, I would want to set the auto-update feature to download files to a local folder, and possibly choose not to install them straight away (or even to install them to a different location).
Background:
- I have a slow internet connection at home, but a fast connection at work.
- I have some portable apps on my work laptop - functioning like installed apps but with the advantages of no installation.
- I have some portable apps on my USB stick - so I can use them whenever, wherever.
Result:
- I want to be able to download apps at work, but not extract to USB until later.
- I want to be able to download apps that I'm not sure if I want to use, so I don't have to download them on the slow home connection once I've decided.
- Also, I want to be able to do a fresh install of an app any time I want, without having to download it again (possibly from a slow connection).
- I want to be able to download an app using the platform, but install it in a location which doesn't have the platform.
I know you said you didn't want to do this, but I think your problems could be solved by downloading the installer package from the website and then deciding when, where, and if to install them.
"Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results." - Albert Einstein
My use of Google indicates that I am insane.
Yeah, you have a point. I guess the best solution is to use the updater to find updated/new apps, and then once I've decided what I want, go to the website and then get them.
That said, it would still be really convenient if I could do it all from the menu.
When 2.0 is released, I might have a look at the source code and see if it's possible to implement this feature for myself. I don't even know what programming language the menu is written in, but I guess I'll find out!
The platform is written in Delphi.
http://www.embarcadero.com/products/delphi
Rick Carter
The original idea is to be implemented thinking on many guys that would update their apps in a same location.
have an option to check %local location% before downloading a new copy of an update then copy the files downloaded to %local location% after the process is done (with an optional cleaning of older copies of the same program).
so as an example in a business situation %local location% is set to //share server/common/PortableAppInstalls
the first person to run updates runs the update and then the update files are copied from C:\Documents and Settings\%user%\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files
to //share server/common/PortableAppInstalls
the second person to run updates gets the common installers from the share location and then downloads the others (and those get copied to //share server/common/PortableAppInstalls)
the third person does the same
and so on
and so forth
optionally the folder would have the outdated installers removed (version 1.2.3 gets removed after 1.2.4 gets downloaded)