Requirements settings bug

[NewsArchive]

I'm sure we've been through this before, but I just had something else
to test and hit the problem again.

Release: 1116

On the Requirements Page I have "Administrator Rights" checked.

Go to WinXP Pro and log in as a non-admin user. Run the installer and I
get "You must be logged in as an administrator when installing this
program". So far so good. But click OK to that message and the
installer just runs as normal. Surely it should exit at that point?
--
Simon Craythorn
InterVations, Inc

[NewsArchive]

Simon,

This is not a bug :)

"Green" checkbox - The condition must be true in order for the installation
to proceed. In other words, display a warning but allow to continue.

"Red" checkbox = The condition must be false in order for the installation
to proceed. Display a warning and terminate.

"Unmarked" checkbox = The condition is not checked and does not affect the
installation.

Does this help?

Friedrich

--
Friedrich Linder
CEO, Lindersoft
www.lindersoft.com
1.954.252.3910

[NewsArchive]

> Simon,
>
> This is not a bug :)
>
> "Green" checkbox - The condition must be true in order for the installation
> to proceed. In other words, display a warning but allow to continue.
>
> "Red" checkbox = The condition must be false in order for the installation
> to proceed. Display a warning and terminate.
>
> "Unmarked" checkbox = The condition is not checked and does not affect the
> installation.
>
> Does this help?

Yep, that does it. Not sure this is the clearest thing to do in the
user interface though? I'm sure I set this before you added the
red/green settings, but even so, I looked at it, it's ticked, it must be
set.

I even checked the help, but I know, "help is under heavy development" :-)
--
Simon Craythorn
InterVations, Inc

[NewsArchive]

Friedrich,
You explained this to me months ago.
I've since passed that along to several other users, who found it equally
unintuitive.

The message is wrong - saying you must be an Administrator but then letting
you run the install anyway.
If you think there's some value in requesting but not requiring
administrator privileges, how about a different dialog box. If the box is
checked, dialog is "you really should be an administrator". If it has the
red X, then "you MUST be an administrator".

But when you have nothing else on your plate, I would be curious as to what
utility you see in having that checkbox support two levels.

Jane

[NewsArchive]

Jane,

Thank you. It's documented in our latest help now :)

Microsoft's user interface guidelines specifically include buttons with
"mixed value" appearance. And a check box can have 3 states. For example,
IS and InstallAnywhere make use of the tri-state check box in the
same way as we do. BTW, a Microsoft senior developer brought the idea of
using such a tri-state check box in the Requirements screen to us (instead
of using the complicated SB4 method).

And that's the advantage of SB5 :) If you don't like the way we are doing
things (in this case the Administrator rights handling), you can use your
own technique. Just add the following 6 lines to the script:

If %WINVER% Greater Than or Equal "$WIN_NT$" Then
If %_SB_INSTALLERFLAG% Not Equals "1" on Position
"$SB_ADMINISTRATORFLAG$" Then
Message Box "You MUST be an administrator." -- ""
Exit Installation
End
End

This means: if the OS is NT4 or greater and the user does not have
administrator rights, display a message and abort installation.

Does the above make sense?

Thanks,
Friedrich

--
Friedrich Linder
CEO, Lindersoft
www.lindersoft.com
1.954.252.3910

[NewsArchive]

>Microsoft's user interface guidelines specifically include buttons with
>"mixed value" appearance. And a check box can have 3 states.

Friedrich,

Not being argumentative; just offering an observation. MS has, and will,
latch onto an UI idea for no practical reason apparent to me other than they
like it. For example, years back I was an intensive Word user. The first
thing I noticed about Word 2000 after upgrading from an earlier version was
many menu items were moved, missing in action, or appeared disabled and did
nothing. It actually took me some minutes to realize these clods imagined
that a self-mutating menu system that changed based on what it believed was
best for my use of the program was a good idea. MS can be really stupid.

I think tri-state check boxes are cool, and now that I understand the
behavior I kind of like it. It's a convenient, compact, means to implement
multiple related options. The problem I see is exactly the one you're
experiencing. It's a tough behavior to communicate visually. Outside of trial
and error, there is nothing about the control that offers any information
about its capabilities.

--
Best regards,

Mark

[NewsArchive]

Mark,

Thank you for your comment. I think (hope <g>) the main problem at the
moment is that the documentation is not finished yet (I have documented the
3 state checkbox now). I swear, it's a nightmare to document such a
powerful tool. Final documentation should be available later next week
(Release Candidate 3).

Thanks,
Friedrich

--
Friedrich Linder
CEO, Lindersoft
www.lindersoft.com
1.954.252.3910

[NewsArchive]

Mark...
That "recently used" menu stuff is about the very first thing I disable when
I install either the W2K or XP O/S or any of the products that use it.
Argh..... LOL...

Jane

[NewsArchive]

Friedrich,
"Not to be argumentative" <g>, but in a word No. It doesn't make sense.

I'm not speaking of the tri-state interface, which I think is fine.

But what doesn't make sense is a box telling the user that he MUST be an
administrator, then letting the installation proceed regardless. If you
have the patience, please try again to explain the logic in that... or one
instance in which one would conceivably want that kind of behavior.

As far as the UI... I personally do read documentation. (I've even killed
enough trees to print out the NetTalk docs...LOL...) But regardless of
whether that behavior is in the docs, it might still be worth modifying the
text properties of the checkbox depending on its state. i.e. Administrator
Rights - not required, Administrator Rights - requested, Administrator
Rights - required.

But forget all that. I'd just really like to know when I'd want to tell a
user he needs to be an Administrator but then let him proceed when he
isn't...

Thanks for your patience.

Jane

[NewsArchive]

Jane,

Okay, I see what you mean and your statement makes sense. I'll change this.

Thanks,
Friedrich

--
Friedrich Linder
CEO, Lindersoft
www.lindersoft.com
1.954.252.3910

[NewsArchive]

Jane,

Changed now...and makes more sense ;-)

Thanks,
Friedrich

--
Friedrich Linder
CEO, Lindersoft
www.lindersoft.com
1.954.252.3910

[NewsArchive]

You'll go far by humoring old women, m'boy... <VBG>

Jane

[NewsArchive]

Only if he does not quote you on that <vbg>.

--
Russ Eggen
www.radfusion.com