I am running a version of skype that I have made portable - thanks to the many suggestions here and on the web. It works fine so far as I have tested it.
It contains no skype information (i.e. no proprietary info).
It is a file structure with a set of tools (.bat batch files) that can be run
from anywhere (i.e. from a shortcut, using pstart). And the file structure can
be placed anywhere, including the desktop (which as you know has spaces in the
file path which can confuse some of the simpler batch file attempts).
You install the commercial skype app. Then you run:
Then you can uninstall the commercial skype app from your desktop.
Later you can update the app version (updates the "app" directory), or the
settings (updates the "data" directory) by using one of the above .bat files
again. You have to delete your USB "app" or "data" directories by hand prior
to doing this, to ensure you do not inadvertently delete stuff on your USB
drive. The presumption is that the USB drive is the primary usage medium
You can later also "restore" the settings on your USB drive back to your computer:
This happens automatically and doesn't ask you to delete the skype settings on
the computer by hand (as it did for the USB drive - again presumeing the
USB drive is the primary usage medium for skype and the desktop is only
The initial directory structure just has the .bat files in it. As you install
skype and settings in it, eventually the directory looks like:
contains the skype application
contains your skype settings, including chat history etc.
contains various other stuff that skype tends to write to the directory:
C:\Documents and Settings\(user)\
except that now such stuff is written here (and can presumably be deleted
later if needed)
from my testing so far the info stored here seem to be various
It currently lacks a .bat file for cleaning up the registry of all skype
related references, but that could be created.
How do I distribute it ? Is there a way for you to host such a construction ?
I am thinking of calling it NPS (Not Portable Skype). Which conveys that it
DOES NOT contain any skype, while conveying the relationship with a conceptual
"Portable Skype". And at the same time not wanting to infringe on the Skype
The reference is perhaps inspired by GNU (GNU's Not Unix).
I realize it is not really along the clean lines of the other Portable Apps.
But I was wondering if it could be a possible template for future dealings with
commercial apps. That is, a way to NOT infringe, YET provide the tools to
the end-user which are perfectly clean of any commercial code.
Another idea is use an autoit script to automate the install/copying.
cowthink 'Dude, why are you staring at me.'
My comment was not just to address skype, but also to address the general problem of how to package a portable app for a commercial app which CANNOT be packaged that way.
That is to git the permission of Skype to package it. And currently this is an only an OSS PA site. Wait til John gits the freeware PA site up. BTW we could always make a GPLed launcher 4 Skype.
As all of ya should know Microsoft is the Evil Empire, and Windows (a.k.a. Winblows or Windoze) is their greatest general, so please make a difference and install Linux or Free BSD on yer Windows comp.
There could be a non-infringing (and open-source) package for the commercial apps. I was proposing some framework and looking for some feedback for how to name it, how it could be packaged that would be most appealing.
Searching a bit more on this site, I see that there are efforts to create launchers for photoshop etc.:
However, I think - just as the guidelines for what is a portable app have been fleshed out - there is currently no guideline for this type of "empty shell" of an app - how to name it to avoid infringement and how to package, what interfaces (for updating app versions and settings) it should have.
I realize that there maybe a freeware version of portableapps in the future (which may address skype), but it will not address other appsm thus the need to clarify how such "launchers" should be structured for commercial apps in general.
(adding this in later)
I seem some posts do refer to the naming and packaging issue.
>I had mine called Portable PS 7.0, BUT trademark issues with Adobe put a stop to the process. The reason being that Adobe has a policy that anytime in press, in the titles, on the internet, wherever, photoshop or any of it programs, are mentioned it must be mentioned thusly: Adobe Photoshop CS2 and the TM sign. also it cannot be used in any program name without the strict permission of the Adobe corporation.
I suppose calling it "NOT Photoshop" would still infringe ?
Ideally there would be a program doing registry and other interceptions like RegMon does:
which would replace the registry accesses, and file accesses by a program.
Which Ceedo evidently does - but from reports is quite buggy (both U3 and Ceedo leaving stuff in an inconsistent state if the flash drive is removed or the computer crashes, for instance):
One of the most compelling features of Ceedo is the fact that it maintains its own file structure that matches right up to Windows. There are the Program Files and Windows folders, the All Users and %userprofile% directories, and even a registry. Ceedo uses these by capturing and changing file calls to their respective cloned folders on the portable drive, and even makes it so that clicking Desktop or My Documents in the Save As dialog boxes will redirect to the respective folders located on the flash drive. With such advanced capabilities under the hood, it's not unreasonable to think that Ceedo could run practically any program.
However, such a program would have better value if it was freeware.
More on Ceedo and U3 problems here:
Ceedo a U3 and PortableApps killer ?