Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

msi files

Tags:
Last response: in Windows 95/98/ME
Share
Anonymous
May 26, 2005 3:26:30 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

I have a 17.3MB version of the Autodesk program Voloview Express (a free
program but no longer available for download from Autodesk) installed on my
computer. The program is used to view and print DWF files without resorting
to AutoCad. I haven't used it a lot, but so far it seems to work fine.

There is also a 24MB version that I've managed to locate and could download,
but I was wondering what the difference was. A Google search turned up this,
from an AutoCad employee in a now-expired help forum (a state of affairs I
hope doesn't come to pass in Windows 98):

"The three DWF-Only versions of VVE will behave the same in your VB
application. The only difference between the 3 downloads are some msi
install time files. The required msi files are already present on the newer
windows platforms therefore we do not include them in the WinXP, 2000, ME
package. Creating the three separate packages saves us from bloating up
everyone's download with 3MB worth of msi files that are only needed by 98
and NT4 users."

I have 98SE, so it would appear I would require this installation. On the
other hand, what I have "ain't broke", so....

Do "msi install time" files have any bearing on the performance of this
program, or do they have only to do with the installation routine? Is it
possible in Windows 98 to do a fully functioning installation without these
files?

I realize that the 3MB he mentions when added to 17.3 comes up a little
short of 24MB, so there may be other issues (or maybe not), but for now I'd
like to just deal with this.

More about : msi files

Anonymous
May 26, 2005 3:50:19 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

It sounds like the fellow in the forum was referring to a newer version of the
utility than you are using (though I don't know for sure and have not ever used the
program). He mentions three downloads, the smaller ones being for operating systems
that already have Windows Installer natively. However, all of the downloads he
mentions would use Windows Installer....if you have the same version installed, then
you may already have Windows Installer on your system, as it simply would not
install without the necessary files.

What version number of the program was he referring to, and is it the same version
number as the one you already have? you may have an earlier version that did not
use Windows Installer.

In the circumstances you describe, I would definitely subscribe to the idea that "if
it ain't broke, don't fix it".
--
Glen Ventura, MS MVP Shell/User, A+
http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
http://www.microsoft.com/communities/conduct/default.ms...


"Roger Fink" <fink@*****.net> wrote in message
news:o g%23WlKaYFHA.2420@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> I have a 17.3MB version of the Autodesk program Voloview Express (a free
> program but no longer available for download from Autodesk) installed on my
> computer. The program is used to view and print DWF files without resorting
> to AutoCad. I haven't used it a lot, but so far it seems to work fine.
>
> There is also a 24MB version that I've managed to locate and could download,
> but I was wondering what the difference was. A Google search turned up this,
> from an AutoCad employee in a now-expired help forum (a state of affairs I
> hope doesn't come to pass in Windows 98):
>
> "The three DWF-Only versions of VVE will behave the same in your VB
> application. The only difference between the 3 downloads are some msi
> install time files. The required msi files are already present on the newer
> windows platforms therefore we do not include them in the WinXP, 2000, ME
> package. Creating the three separate packages saves us from bloating up
> everyone's download with 3MB worth of msi files that are only needed by 98
> and NT4 users."
>
> I have 98SE, so it would appear I would require this installation. On the
> other hand, what I have "ain't broke", so....
>
> Do "msi install time" files have any bearing on the performance of this
> program, or do they have only to do with the installation routine? Is it
> possible in Windows 98 to do a fully functioning installation without these
> files?
>
> I realize that the 3MB he mentions when added to 17.3 comes up a little
> short of 24MB, so there may be other issues (or maybe not), but for now I'd
> like to just deal with this.
>
>
Anonymous
May 26, 2005 5:02:52 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

Hi Glen. I don't know the release number of the 24MB program (unless/until I
download it); I'd have to re-search for that link, which I should have
saved. My version is 2000.15.42.129. Judging by some of the complaints I
read, AutoDesk's releases may have had more to do with maintaining
compatibility with AutoCad Updates (14, '00, '02), and the different sized
versions were variants within a given release, perhaps one of the late ones,
responding to Windows issues. The program is fairly limited in what it does
(commendably, IMO) so esoteric use of it is impossible, and any problems
should be readily apparent with basic operations, since that's all there
are. If there is a problem, I'll know soon enough. I like your advice and
I'm taking it.

glee wrote:
> It sounds like the fellow in the forum was referring to a newer
> version of the utility than you are using (though I don't know for
> sure and have not ever used the program). He mentions three
> downloads, the smaller ones being for operating systems that already
> have Windows Installer natively. However, all of the downloads he
> mentions would use Windows Installer....if you have the same version
> installed, then you may already have Windows Installer on your
> system, as it simply would not install without the necessary files.
>
> What version number of the program was he referring to, and is it the
> same version number as the one you already have? you may have an
> earlier version that did not use Windows Installer.
>
> In the circumstances you describe, I would definitely subscribe to
> the idea that "if it ain't broke, don't fix it".
>
> "Roger Fink" <fink@*****.net> wrote in message
> news:o g%23WlKaYFHA.2420@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>> I have a 17.3MB version of the Autodesk program Voloview Express (a
>> free
>> program but no longer available for download from Autodesk)
>> installed on my computer. The program is used to view and print DWF
>> files without resorting
>> to AutoCad. I haven't used it a lot, but so far it seems to work
>> fine.
>>
>> There is also a 24MB version that I've managed to locate and could
>> download,
>> but I was wondering what the difference was. A Google search turned
>> up this,
>> from an AutoCad employee in a now-expired help forum (a state of
>> affairs I
>> hope doesn't come to pass in Windows 98):
>>
>> "The three DWF-Only versions of VVE will behave the same in your VB
>> application. The only difference between the 3 downloads are some
>> msi
>> install time files. The required msi files are already present on
>> the newer windows platforms therefore we do not include them in the
>> WinXP, 2000, ME package. Creating the three separate packages saves
>> us from bloating up everyone's download with 3MB worth of msi files
>> that are only needed by 98
>> and NT4 users."
>>
>> I have 98SE, so it would appear I would require this installation.
>> On the
>> other hand, what I have "ain't broke", so....
>>
>> Do "msi install time" files have any bearing on the performance of
>> this
>> program, or do they have only to do with the installation routine?
>> Is it
>> possible in Windows 98 to do a fully functioning installation
>> without these files?
>>
>> I realize that the 3MB he mentions when added to 17.3 comes up a
>> little
>> short of 24MB, so there may be other issues (or maybe not), but for
>> now I'd
>> like to just deal with this.
!