![]() VLC is a good example of that, since you go to to get it, not vlc.org or it's not like the unwary couldn't run into that kind of thing anyway. Then again, that's not really a problem introduced by being in an app store either, just a different version of the same issue. You have all the problems of any app store of course, fakes and such, so you want to make sure you are getting the one from VideoLAN. Since VideoLAN is publishing it themselves, there shouldn't be any differences. On the downside, if something goes awry in a store app, and it decides it's not going to update or uninstall or whatever, that can be a bit frustrating- then again, that's always been the case, this just gives you a more singular thing to be mad at, and moves the anger from the app to the store. Using a store can help the devs by helping make it so they don't have to worry about creating their own update process and can lean on the OS to handle that for them. They help reduce the system clutter, by centralizing the management and updating of installed apps. This experience is the main reason you'd want install from the store, but there are other benefits, they are just less obvious. The difference is how involved you have to be in the process of downloading and installing and updating, and how much effort the developer has to put into having a self updater.īecause of mobile, people more and more expect a mobile type experience- apps install from a store, and are updated by the store/OS. Is there any difference between these two methods, and which is better? Given the question being asked, I'd say it might actually be more beneficial for the OP to go through the store rather than direct from VideoLAN. ![]() More and more, I'd argue getting an official version from a store makes more sense for the non-technical user for a number of reasons. This is an advantage to the technically comfortable user for sure, but it's less so to your average non-techie type. If the companies that provide the store were doing a good job, it should be less of a problem to at least some degree.Īdditionally, I prefer standalone software than relying on the Microsoft >Store, not least because you can ALWAYS get the latest version from >. And being open source this is always a problem regardless, it's not unique to store apps. So presumably your regular user would do the same thing they'd do in a store- they'd type "VLC" into search, and the end result would be the same- they'd get the thing they are actually looking for. org or anything that says "VLC" in it to get it. Looking outside the store isn't automatically a solution to that, VLC itself has this problem, since you go to not vlc.com or. VideoLAN really should at least update the UWP description to mention it's unmaintained status.Īlso, many folks try to 're-introduce' programs themselves The main hit that comes up on searching the store is regular VLC, not the discontinued UWP version. Yes, I am aware that you can get VLC via the Microsoft Store via the UWP, but why bother?
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |