[identity profile] knittinggoddess.livejournal.com posting in [community profile] techrecovery
I do phone support for a graphic editing app. Today I got someone for whom the entire app suite has been acting up, and eventually I discover that she has a 64-bit machine. Now our app needs to be installed to a different file path than the default under XP-64, but the IT guy at her company didn't do any research when the first attempt at install failed.

Instead of installing to C:\Program Files(x84), he installed to C:\my company

That's right. He made up a random-ass folder, put it on the root level of the hard drive and expected everything to go fine. Instead of going to the software company's website when the first two attempts at an install went wrong, or even Googling the damn thing, he just pulled god knows what out of his ass and left me to pick up the pieces in a 90-minute call from hell.

Also, a bonus from a coworker: he had a caller who was trying to install his internet upgrade of version 9 by opening the v7 copy and running the updater. What the hell?

Date: 2006-11-17 09:38 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] lunrwolf.livejournal.com
He made up a random-ass folder, put it on the root level of the hard drive and expected everything to go fine.

Done from the installer? That should work just fine, unless the developers have hard-coded a path in the program.

In which case, it's their fault really, not his.

(Of course, this might be XP64-specific suckage, in which case, ignore the above and insert a rant about braindead design decisions in XP64 :D)

Date: 2006-11-17 11:18 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] kizayaen.livejournal.com
IAWTC.

There is no reason that making up a random folder for an install should not work. If it doesn't, then it's bad design on the part of whichever software package makes the requirement - whether it's the OS or the app itself.

Date: 2006-11-17 12:31 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] conglacio.livejournal.com
yeh, if it gave him the option of using a different folder, then it should work with it.

And all software should come with the option of using a different folder. It's rude not to, and can cause trouble in some cases.

Date: 2006-11-17 01:29 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] thecrazyfinn.livejournal.com
So? You're installer is broken. There's reasons to install to folders other than C:\Program Files. Very good ones in some cases.

Date: 2006-11-17 03:37 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] samwize.livejournal.com
Yuh. Sounds like a pretty lame installer to me. What is it, a batch file running a bunch of regsvr32 statements on hardcoded .DLL's?

Date: 2006-11-18 06:16 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] jon787.livejournal.com
I agree, whoever hard coded the path in the binary should be shot. Of course I can't build the software where I work unless its in a certain location. Some idiot hard coded the path in the Makefiles somewhere.

Profile

techrecovery: (Default)
Elitist Computer Nerd Posse

April 2017

S M T W T F S
      1
2345678
91011121314 15
16171819202122
23242526272829
30      

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Mar. 21st, 2026 05:43 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios