|
Login to view full posting options
|
| Author |
Message |
Google
AdSense
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Seawolf
Ultra nForced
Joined: 23 Jun 2002
Posts: 14876
Location: In circles
|
 Posted: Tue Jun 03, 2008 2:12 pm Post subject: Windows Installer 4.5 |
|
|
|
Terribly exciting news I'm sure 
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=5a58b56f-60b6-4412-95b9-54d056d6f9f4&DisplayLang=en
| Quote: |
Overview
The Microsoft® Windows® Installer (MSI) is the application installation and configuration service for Windows. Version 4.5 of the Windows Installer has several new features, including:
Multiple Package Transaction: In a multiple package transaction, you can create a single transaction from multiple packages. In a multiple package transaction, a chainer is used to dynamically include packages in the transaction. If any of the packages do not install as expected, you can roll back the installation.
Embedded UI Handler: You can embed a custom user interface (UI) handler in the Windows Installer package. This makes a custom UI easier to integrate. You can also invoke an embedded UI handler from the Add or Remove item in Control Panel. Or, you can invoke an embedded UI handler during a Windows Installer repair process.
Embedded Chainer: You can use the embedded chainer to add packages to a multiple package transaction. You can use an embedded chainer to enable installation events across multiple packages. For example, you can enable the install-on-demand events, the repair events, and the uninstall events across multiple packages.
Update Supersedence Resiliency: This feature enables you to correct for changes in the FeatureComponent table during supersedence.
Shared Component Patching Resiliency During Uninstall: This feature makes sure that the most recent version of a component is available to all the products.
Custom Action Execution On Update Uninstall: This feature enables an update to add or change a custom action so that the custom action is called when an update is uninstalled.
After installation of this package, the version of Windows Installer on the system will be upgraded to 4.5.
Top of page
System Requirements
Supported Operating Systems: Windows Server 2003; Windows Server 2008; Windows Vista; Windows XP
The Windows Installer 4.5 redistributable can be installed on Windows XP Service Pack 2, Windows XP Service Pack 3, Windows Server 2003 Service Pack 1, Windows Server 2003 Service Pack 2, Windows Vista, Windows Vista Service Pack 1, and Windows Server 2008 in X86, X64 and IA64 flavors. |
| Quote: |
Apart from the feature work that we did in Windows Installer 4.5, we made a few changes to Windows Installer to address some user feedback or pain points. Here's some of the important issues that were addressed:
Added SeBackupPrivilige back to the Windows Installer service. This sould help any custom actions that needed this privilige like the ones that were reported on the Vista Compatibility Team blog.
Some case sensitive service name comparisions in InstallValidate used to result in an unnecessary files-in-use message on Vista. This is now fixed in Windows Installer 4.5.
When a patch added new content in the form of a new component and that patch was being uninstalled, we used to remove that content, even if that content is shared by other products. This is now fixed in Windows Installer 4.5.
In addition to this, since Windows Installer 4.5 is the latest release of Windows Installer, it will have all the fixes and feature work that we did till Vista SP1. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
daglesj
nForced²
Joined: 10 Feb 2005
Posts: 1575
Location: on the cusp of uranus
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 03, 2008 3:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Thats a three tissue post if ever I saw one!  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TwL
=| ~TwL~ |=
nForce Padawan
Joined: 18 Jul 2007
Posts: 620
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 03, 2008 4:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
I keep here wondering what other nice nice nice ms things this brought with it. even the older edition tryied hardcore way to get to ms websites and internet while there wasn't a single reason why should installer do such thing.
Not saying it would be anything bad just questioning the connections. the clt site begins to be really curious after almost every single inside windows software tryies to connect the server by any way possible.
Last edited by TwL on Tue Jun 03, 2008 4:28 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Seawolf
Ultra nForced
Joined: 23 Jun 2002
Posts: 14876
Location: In circles
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 03, 2008 4:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Well since I ignore paranoid rambling in broken English
| daglesj wrote: |
| Thats a three tissue post if ever I saw one! |
Yeah (whatever that means) I was wondering why I even posted it since I forgot to post about the Windows Search 4.0 Preview (which does more for people.)
But hey I like stuff that improves the basic Windows experience. I think I'll put this in my archive for installation immediately after fresh installs.
Last edited by Seawolf on Tue Jun 03, 2008 4:31 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TwL
=| ~TwL~ |=
nForce Padawan
Joined: 18 Jul 2007
Posts: 620
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 03, 2008 4:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Seawolf wrote: |
| Well since I ignore paranoid rambling in broken English |
hehe, yeah sure.. Already 7 patches of driver signing by microsoft for absolutely no reason out. I'd call that hardcore way to restrict user from using their operating system as they wish by blocking any decent software out to fit in microsoft policy. While their solutions were already broken for security. Last answer I heard from ms was that 'It's users fault Windows Vista is so unsecure' then why the hell they did block us from protecting it? 'Reliability' yeah right 500$ per driver.. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Seawolf
Ultra nForced
Joined: 23 Jun 2002
Posts: 14876
Location: In circles
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 03, 2008 4:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| I'd call that enforcing a rule that was built into the OS at launch. As for the rest of your post, it doesn't make any sense so I'll just leave it at that. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TwL
=| ~TwL~ |=
nForce Padawan
Joined: 18 Jul 2007
Posts: 620
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 03, 2008 4:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Seawolf wrote: |
| I'd call that enforcing a rule that was built into the OS at launch. As for the rest of your post, it doesn't make any sense so I'll just leave it at that. |
yeah, was just making my point that why not question things. Sure hope this new installer is fast.
Last edited by TwL on Tue Jun 03, 2008 4:51 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Seawolf
Ultra nForced
Joined: 23 Jun 2002
Posts: 14876
Location: In circles
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 03, 2008 4:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Well, MS never said that for one thing. They put control in the hands of the user instead of the app developers, and they did say/imply that UAC was in place both because of lazy developers and lazy users (not making standard accounts.) But they never said that Vista is insecure.
And they haven't blocked anyone from protecting it. They only blocked some companies from protecting it the horribly system intrusive way they were used to doing it. I don't know about you, but I'd far rather put a system from MS blocking malware in place, because app developers would know exactly what was there, then have some random 'tard of a company be able to put whatever they like on the kernel and make the system all crashy whenever they feel like it.
So, yes. Reliability. Definately.
Last edited by Seawolf on Tue Jun 03, 2008 4:56 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Google
AdSense
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
nForcersHQ supporters: Impar, wardog, MiniMax, envoid, jasonh, Krips, VAIOMAN, Zetro, sensai, me&er, RElliott, ScottRempel, JHogarth, IcemanIX, Etraman, KA, Tabajara, Xiomberg, ruddywarrior, hookahmike, MMoore, RHodgson, RGilson, powerarmour, Sepal, RRavat, DigitalRuin, HammerheadTech, Bane, DHunt, Fat Jez, baikal, Jumpin' Jon, MGadzikowski, JBishop, RDeBok, JDavies, HDHyland, TMorris
|
|
| |
