ALLUSERS=1 or =2?
Hey guys,
I'm looking for an official position here on this questions. Me and a colleague are at a stand still on the issue. So I'm looking for an official document/web page that explains the clear difference between the two...
If you can help, I'll take it!
Googling it up to now has given me different results!
Thanks!!!
0 Comments
[ - ] Hide Comments

so that the conversation will remain readable.
Answer this question
or Comment on this question for clarity
Answers
Fau,
The way I understand it is:
ALLUSERS=2
Attempt to install per-machine, if not possible attempt per-user
ALLUSERS=1
Attemp to install per-machine, if not possible fail
Anyone correct me if I'm wrong - just my understanding of it.
Thanks,
Dunnpy
The way I understand it is:
ALLUSERS=2
Attempt to install per-machine, if not possible attempt per-user
ALLUSERS=1
Attemp to install per-machine, if not possible fail
Anyone correct me if I'm wrong - just my understanding of it.
Thanks,
Dunnpy
Please log in to comment
ORIGINAL: FauReally?!? Well, I used the search term
Googling it up to now has given me different results!
. "windows installer" +ALLUSERS
and got this http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa367559(VS.85).aspx as the first hit. If anyone feels like arguing the toss with Microsoft, feel free.
Please log in to comment
Keep in mind this property acts differently depending on the operating system.
Please log in to comment
I went to find a doc on this to reference for you and it's actually detailed in the MSDN article linked above.
[blockquote]Windows Vista: Windows Installer version 4.0 complies with User Account Control (UAC). If the user has user access privileges, and ALLUSERS=2, the installer performs a per-machine installation only if Admin credentials are provided to the UAC dialog box. If UAC is enabled and the correct Admin credentials are not provided, the installation fails with an error stating that administrator privileges are required. If UAC is disabled by the registry key, group policy, or the control panel, the UAC dialog box is not displayed and the installation fails with an error stating that administrator privileges are required.[/blockquote] [blockquote]Windows XP: If the user has user access privileges, and ALLUSERS=2, Windows Installer performs a per-user installation and uses the folders in the user's profile.[/blockquote] [blockquote]Windows 2000: The Windows Installer performs a per-user or per-machine installation depending on the value of the ALLUSERS property. If the ALLUSERS property is not set, the Installer does a per-user installation. If the ALLUSERS property is set to 1, the Installer attempts a per-machine installation. The per-machine installation succeeds only if the user has administrative access privileges on the computer. If the ALLUSERS property is set to 2, the Installer first attempts a per-machine installation. In this case, the per-machine installation succeeds only if the user has administrative access privileges on the computer. Otherwise, the Installer does a per-user installation.[/blockquote]
Please log in to comment
TK,
Yeah I read that from the link Ian provided.
However I can't seem to understand how the "property acts differently depending on the operating system".
Windows XP and 2000 performs either a per-machine or per-user depending on the user's privileges when ALLUSERS=2; admin or regular user.
For Windows Vista and ALLUSERS=2 it also does this if I interpret the information correctly.
If the user decided to enter the admin credentials in the UAC/LUA dialog or whatever MS is calling it now ;) it will perform a per-machine as the user will now be elevated with admin privileges, same as for XP & 2K. If the user for some reason fail to provide the correct credentials (password) the installation fails. So it seems that on Vista a per-user install will be performed if the user does not enter the admin credentials meaning; normal user without elevation.
So the three operating systems described seems to work the same when ALLSERS=2 IMO.
If you do not agree or have any real-life experience please post your details.
/Kim
Yeah I read that from the link Ian provided.
However I can't seem to understand how the "property acts differently depending on the operating system".
Windows XP and 2000 performs either a per-machine or per-user depending on the user's privileges when ALLUSERS=2; admin or regular user.
For Windows Vista and ALLUSERS=2 it also does this if I interpret the information correctly.
If the user decided to enter the admin credentials in the UAC/LUA dialog or whatever MS is calling it now ;) it will perform a per-machine as the user will now be elevated with admin privileges, same as for XP & 2K. If the user for some reason fail to provide the correct credentials (password) the installation fails. So it seems that on Vista a per-user install will be performed if the user does not enter the admin credentials meaning; normal user without elevation.
So the three operating systems described seems to work the same when ALLSERS=2 IMO.
If you do not agree or have any real-life experience please post your details.
/Kim
Please log in to comment
I don't have any real-world experience with it as I've always used ALLUSERS=1. I just remember reading up on this a couple of years ago when researching a technical paper I was writing.
According to the MSDN article, with XP, it sounds like ALLUSERS=2 doesn't fall back to a per-user install if the admin credentials aren't there. It doesn't explicitly say that, but it's very odd that they call out XP and 2000 seperately when the behaviour is the same?
Also, with Vista it doesn't automatically fall back to a per-user install... which is a different behaviour.
The only way to find out is to test it... but I'm not that bored today. It would be nice to settle the issue though.
As an aside, I can't see why anyone would want to use ALLUSERS=2.
According to the MSDN article, with XP, it sounds like ALLUSERS=2 doesn't fall back to a per-user install if the admin credentials aren't there. It doesn't explicitly say that, but it's very odd that they call out XP and 2000 seperately when the behaviour is the same?
Also, with Vista it doesn't automatically fall back to a per-user install... which is a different behaviour.
The only way to find out is to test it... but I'm not that bored today. It would be nice to settle the issue though.
As an aside, I can't see why anyone would want to use ALLUSERS=2.
Please log in to comment
According to the MSDN article, with XP, it sounds like ALLUSERS=2 doesn't fall back to a per-user install if the admin credentials aren't there. It doesn't explicitly say that, but it's very odd that they call out XP and 2000 seperately when the behaviour is the same?
Well, Microsoft's description seems not to be that clear all the time.
I'm sure that if the user is an admin it will perform an per-machine install.
I havn't played a lot with Vista so can't say for sure how the UAC affect is for the ALLUSERS property with a value of 2.
Well, Microsoft's description seems not to be that clear all the time.
I'm sure that if the user is an admin it will perform an per-machine install.
I havn't played a lot with Vista so can't say for sure how the UAC affect is for the ALLUSERS property with a value of 2.
Please log in to comment
Wouldn't a ALLUSERS=1 just solve the issue? I mean, if our base is to have our packages available for everyone on the machine AND ALSO having the msi's installed always always by an Administrator, we could force ALLUSERS=1 and the problem would then be nullified... What do you think?
Please log in to comment
Yes.. if one of your requirements is to always install the app per-machine, then you want to use ALLUSERS=1.
Like I said, I can't imagine why ALLUSERS=2 was even created as an option. Perhaps to facilitate pointless nerdy discussions like this one.
Like I said, I can't imagine why ALLUSERS=2 was even created as an option. Perhaps to facilitate pointless nerdy discussions like this one.
Please log in to comment
Yes.. if one of your requirements is to always install the app per-machine, then you want to use ALLUSERS=1.
Like I said, I can't imagine why ALLUSERS=2 was even created as an option. Perhaps to facilitate pointless nerdy discussions like this one.
LOLOLOL!
Oh god, this probably just made my afternoon! Thanks TK! hehehehehe
Please log in to comment
The answers are located on MSDN @ http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=allusers%3D1&source=web&cd=2&ved=0CCoQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.itninja.com%2Fquestion%2Fallusers-1-or-2&ei=KmR7T_HlMNSmsALR67GNAw&usg=AFQjCNFX91Gv40bchxqoYJZON24agO9RKw
Please log in to comment
-
Sorry... I meant
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/aa367559(v=vs.85).aspx
Where is the edit button?
Comments