Are trial versions installing in-place (ie overwriting existing versions) working as designed?

RE: DeNoise

I thought these installation issues had been ironed out long ago?

My DeNoise perpetual version is currently v3.2.x.

I’ve run into some serious flawed functionality with v3.2.x See here

So, I decide to down the current version (v3.7.x in Trial mode) to find out if these serious flaws are corrected. Makes sense, right? Find out if the flaws are fixed before considering an update.

  1. Download v3.7.x installer (current version; not currently licensed; Trial mode first)
  2. Run installer, installer doesn’t ask for a new install path
  3. installer happily writes Trial version v3.7.x in-place over licensed v3.2.x
  4. this is NOT good; working, licensed version is now poof and would need to be reinstalled.

Hi, You should raise a support request with this issue as it might encourage them to check users account before installing. What you describe is the normal software upgrade cycle, unfortunately they have always overwritten the last install without asking the op first … perils of a registry based system.

Previous versions of DeNoise allowed an install path.

In fact, Topaz Labs apps are the only apps I have that install without asking about overwriting and giving the opportunity for a new install path. This makes it very inconvenient to test a new version without mucking up the current version. This is bad design practice (and I’m a degreed software engineer by trade).

I agree with you and I have personally requested it many times, the only way I know of and what I do is delete the registry entries … not a good choice.

Just heard back from the TL Operations Manager.

He says the one-version-only-at-a-time is working as designed due to the “primary plugin” (?) nature of the apps. [I don’t really buy that, but…] I have noted that multiple versions do dip into each other’s registry entries for prefs data. Other than that, I haven’t had an issue.

But, of course, the one-version-only has not always been the case, so I’m unclear why that approach is the only one that is feasible? I’m sure there are plenty of technical aspects, but installs tied to registry only is a hard argument to make; furthermore, even registry entires can be delineated on version can they not?

Regardless, it’s not a convenient approach for me and I won’t be playing in that game anymore if it doesn’t change. Not sure how the Beta Testers are dealing with this?

I agree with you on this as the Primary Plugin excuse that can be easily fixed by adding a version number at the end of the plugin name.