I have and idea. Sense we allow people to host their own apps why don't we have people host their own "official" (or "non-official") PortableApps.com suite packages if they wanted they could host support for non "PA.com" portable apps. What do you think?
New: DesktopSnowOK (Jan 6, 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
Bad idea
Tim
Things have got to get better, they can't get worse, or can they?
What happened to the nice happy Tim we all know and love. That Tim explained his thoughts, and left smiley faces in his posts, and was just all-around courteous to other forum members.
The developer formerly known as ZGitRDun8705
I think I kind of saw this as becoming a survey/vote and I knew that others would be much more verbose than me as to why it was not a good idea. So I just cast a quick vote
Tim
Things have got to get better, they can't get worse, or can they?
Probably not a good idea. Too many unofficial packages would lead to a lot of confusion among users, could lead to redundancy between developers having similar packages, and including of non-supported apps in a semi-official package just shouldnt be done.
The developer formerly known as ZGitRDun8705
Not mentioning that my brand new 8gb thumb drive will be filled too soon, since I download and install everything published here... even if I don't use it...
If a packet hits a pocket on a socket on a port,
and the bus is interrupted as a very last resort,
and the address of the memory makes your floppy disk abort,
then the socket packet pocket has an error to report
I second that and my 2Gb drive is already full.
Never curse the alligator till you done cross the bridge.