What's the deal with .pkg installers?

[Swrdfshtrombone]

hello there;

as i usually scour versiontracker for advice prior to downloading something, i've come across many debates in the various app forums. one thing that consistently comes up is the use of a .pkg installer. seems some people are adverse to using programs that utilize this method of installation.

so i guess i'm wondering: geez...what's all the fuss about?

 

[perfessor101]

Beats me. For all intents and purposes a package installer is little different from any other kind of installer except everything is always in the package and not immediately visible to the casual user.

 

[DeltaMac]

I think that software which uses an installer that simply places and fills an app, makes some people nervous. Why not just simply provide the app (which is in a .pkg form anyway) Why does an installer need to run which just copies files into a .pkg?
But, in my opinion, if it uses the standard Apple installer, you can always view the files before completing the install - telling you what gets installed, and where. Most simple apps are just that, simple apps with nothing installed anywhere else.

 

[Swrdfshtrombone]

I think that software which uses an installer that simply places and fills an app, makes some people nervous. Why not just simply provide the app (which is in a .pkg form anyway) Why does an installer need to run which just copies files into a .pkg?

So...it's a security issue? People are afraid of having the program install weird files, or worse, mess up directories & files?

I guess that makes sense. I sometimes wonder why some apps don't just use a .dmg file, why I have to open an installer, go through all the steps, blah blah blah...

But still, why are people so vehemently opposed to the use of .pkgs? There is some pretty fervent debate, of which I have no background or context. I just want to be in the loop.

My impression, especially when I read Versiontracker posts, is that while our Mac community is niche and boutique--loyal to the core--it is also chock full of people riddled with dogmatic conceptions of "proper usage", like secret or unwritten rules of Mac decorum. I'm more than willing to subscribe and adhere to these ways if they make sense, but not to the level of paranoia and fanatasicm I see in some forums (e.g. the huge debate of shareware apps "phoning home" to verify serials, etc).

I got my first Mac almost 15 years ago: a Mac SE. Grew up with them; loved them since. But I've never developed the astounding level of craziness that some of these people demonstrate. Is it because I'm not a programmer/developer? That I'm not in the tech industry?

um....but I digress...

so....yeah....pkg installers....

 

[Cheryl]

I have noticed that package installers have more than just the simple app in it. Apple started this with OS X. It could be just to simplify things or make a pretty package of the normal installer.

If you want to check out what is in the package, Pacifist should do the job.

There are some people who become fanatics over the simple things because they have nothing better to do with their time. There are some people who get crazy and over board because that's their personality.

Personally, life is too short.

 

[fryke]

If done right, .pkg installers are really nice. They use Apple's way for installing things - and if Apple's done it right, nothing can go wrong, right? (Wrong.) ;-)

For the most apps I've found, the installers are just fine and dandy. However, there was a phase where several .pkg installers applied wrong permissions to the /Applications folder, which led to errors and stuff. Thus, I always do a 'repair permissions' with Disk Utility after installing one or more packages.