Do you run PortableApps as primary software?

I test mine on the PC. It's fine to do this, people usually do this so they know where all the junk goes.

I do that with a lot of my apps. Honestly, I think that PortableApps are faster and they don't clog up the registry. You might notice that your PC will last longer without having to reinstall Windows because of registry issues.

for using PortableApps stationary on a pc, i would only use the PortableApps for the programs you don't use often. the downside to using only them is that they won't have all the file associations and shell extensions that the installed versions will have. for example: installing gimp lets me double click a gimp file to open it or right click a jpeg and say "edit with gimp". i would say install the programs you use a lot and interact with files, like openoffice, gimp, sumatra, etc, and use PortableApps versions of things like utilities and games.

It's a great option, I keep Sudoku and poker on my Pc as normal apps. I have Open office all ready as a normal program, so I don't use that. Most of the time they are better because of the reduced file size. I just wouldn't use the menu, just have them as seprate apps in your program files.

I've expressed my opinion on this in this post:

https://portableapps.com/node/12918#comment-78459

I actually keep my PortableApps on both the host PC and the USB Drive. They are automatically synced when I insert the drive. I install the apps to the host PC first, delete the Other folder and Help link from the directory, run the app and set all the settings, then copy it to my removable drive.

Some interesting information in this thread. With my very limited knowledge I'd assumed that to make apps portable would have required simplification possibly resulting in slower speed and/or perhaps significant reduction in functionality. It appears my assumption is incorrect and the PortableApps would suit my simple needs very well as my primary software.

My second assumption was that running PortableApps from a folder in C: on a local HD would have been faster/beneficial for use as primary software as compared to running it from a USB drive of whatever sort. I note the comment in https://portableapps.com/node/12918 that "In addition many apps here are UPXed to lower space. This can speed up the initial launch on a USB stick, but on a HD it may slightly lower launch time. It wouldn't effect the program after it is launched." Is, therefore, my second assumption also incorrect?

Mine are in c:\portableapps. I don't always run the menu, I just make desktop shortcuts to c:\portableapps\portableapps\firefoxportable... etc. Then every so often I copy the folders of the the ones I modify (40is extensions in FF) to my USB and external hard drive for portable use. Takes a while to copy, but I don't have to update extensions more than once. It also makes it easy to upgrade to a new computer.

Miss the odd file extension, but can set them manually, and would never go back to full installations.