The Portable Freeware Collection Forums

Hi everybody. I'm sure that all of you know what portableapps.com is! It's so famous that their type of portable apps stand a "non-official" standard for portable apps. I say that because I see some freewares like FreeCommander makes a version call "portable version type .PAF".

That is what I want to ask. What is portable type PAF of portableapps.com? Does it have any exception? What is the difference between it and other types of portable apps?

Thanks for your reading.

mynokia wrote:Hi everybody. I'm sure that all of you know what portableapps.com is! It's so famous that their type of portable apps stand a "non-official" standard for portable apps. I say that because I see some freewares like FreeCommander makes a version call "portable version type .PAF".

That is what I want to ask. What is portable type PAF of portableapps.com? Does it have any exception? What is the difference between it and other types of portable apps?

Thanks for your reading.

PAF is not much more than a directory structure that crappy PA.com menu needs to correctly handle programs.
It has nothing to portability.

Actually a PAF in it of itself is a glorified self extracting ZIP file that places the PortableApps directory structure in the location of your choice. The PA Menu will handle any portable application folder placed in it, but will make all .exe's within that folder visible in the PortableApps menu. Since Portable Apps creates their own launcher executable, to call the program executable, they will only ever have the one executable in the root folder of the app. Other than that, there isn't much difference between PA.com's flavor of portable apps versus others, except packaging. Do you buy your peanut butter in a space saving tube, or do you buy it in familiar plastic jar, or perhaps a glass jar pre-mixed with jelly? It depends on what your preferences are I guess.

Paf is actually an nsis installer that uses lzma compression,,,

Thank you so much. So that the PAF just is a package that PA.com makes, it likes a launcher, zipper and something to extract files into a folder of portable programs. So can I do the similar work to make a program portable? Do you know other ways to do this?

All PA.com programs may use the same installer, but it doesn't mean that "PAF" and installer are the same thing, they are not.
PAF is abbreviation of "PortableApps.com Format".

I tend to avoid anything that adds needless complexity or trash to my system. I usually select a non-PAF version of applications when given a choice. Couldn’t care less about their menu thing.

linuxx wrote:I tend to avoid anything that adds needless complexity or trash to my system. I usually select a non-PAF version of applications when given a choice. Couldn’t care less about their menu thing.

So do I.

As do I. That said You don't need to use their menu (I use pStart so I don't need it) and I love my Apps from his collection

Firefox
MirandaIM
Wink

They update great and Clean themselves up very well.

EDIT: I forgot to mention ClamWin Portable, Audacity Portable & 7Zip Portable

m^(2) wrote:All PA.com programs may use the same installer, but it doesn't mean that "PAF" and installer are the same thing, they are not.
PAF is abbreviation of "PortableApps.com Format".

Thanks for the good link! That's all I want to know about this format "PAF" .

@linuxx, m^2, MiDoJo: I think PA.com do a good job, and I'm so curious that why don't you use their works? Or you can do better? Can you tell me some way to do the same thing?

mynokia wrote:

m^(2) wrote:All PA.com programs may use the same installer, but it doesn't mean that "PAF" and installer are the same thing, they are not.
PAF is abbreviation of "PortableApps.com Format".

Thanks for the good link! That's all I want to know about this format "PAF" .

@linuxx, m^2, MiDoJo: I think PA.com do a good job, and I'm so curious that why don't you use their works? Or you can do better? Can you tell me some way to do the same thing?

1. Their work is often plainly useless because they "portabilize" already portable programs. Well, not useless, it's needed for their menu, it increases number of programs in the platform and shows a lovely splash screen with so many magic phrases..John T. Haller, Rare Ideas LLC, PortableApps.com.
2. In other cases - I use their launchers, but modify them to remove useless rubbish that only slows them down (Mostly splash screen, but when I remove it, there's no point in having config file. CRC checks go out too.) and change directory structure to something less complicated and more common:
\bin
\doc
\cfg

How to portabilize something?
2 ways, either use JauntePE or search the PortableApps.com development forum, you'll find several guides there. While I don't like some of their actions, they have most active development community and it's probably the best place to go.

linuxx wrote:I tend to avoid anything that adds needless complexity or trash to my system. I usually select a non-PAF version of applications when given a choice. Couldn’t care less about their menu thing.

LOL
PAF doesn't add needless complexity or trash to your system, that's kinda the point of portable apps, they don't add ANYTHING to your system other than the files you copy ("install") .

TheFrog wrote:

linuxx wrote:I tend to avoid anything that adds needless complexity or trash to my system. I usually select a non-PAF version of applications when given a choice. Couldn’t care less about their menu thing.

LOL
PAF doesn't add needless complexity or trash to your system, that's kinda the point of portable apps, they don't add ANYTHING to your system other than the files you copy ("install") .

Yes, especially with programs that are portable without it.
You don't call increasing directory tree depth by 2, adding useless launcher; readmes and sources that are irrelevant to the original app, several directories and some things called AppInfo that don't serve any purpose either thrashing system?
Also, when launcher actually does something, PAF is unnecessarily complicated and therefore - thrashes system too. That's why I rewrite all PA.com launchers that I use.

2m^(2)
And you miss one thing: the word "Portable" is treated as something cool and jazzy, like "super" or "hiper" prefixes in the hardware world.

You just don't get right mood.

Currently I am waiting for tutorial how to write "Portable Hello World"

mynokia wrote:@linuxx, m^2, MiDoJo: I think PA.com do a good job, and I'm so curious that why don't you use their works? Or you can do better? Can you tell me some way to do the same thing?

I do use some of their works, I found pStart (here @ TPFC) before I'd even looked at John Haller's PAF Site.

A lot of things they make , as m^(2) stated, are already portable (i.e. Keepass, Peazip, and he used to have cCleaner but seems to have dropped it).

I don't use MOST of the programs that he has in the collection so they'd be useless and taking up space on my drive; and I use ALOT of programs that he doesn't make a paf for.

I tend to frown upon premade collections, and want to make a drive//drives that fit the purposes I'm using them (or giving them to others) for.
Generally Speaking I have no problem, and much respect for John's programs; I just have use for a select few. That said I went through my drive and I have a few others that I didn't previously mention(see my EDIT above)