Amazingly screwed-up installation experience



  • Today's star is [url=https://www.yoyogames.com/studio]Game Maker: Studio[/url]. My son, who is in his last year of primary school, is doing an extension course on making video games (something he's always wanted to do), and this is the software they're using.

    Note that it is not open-source software and the IDE is a Windows-only program. Also, on the kids' computers I have an admin account and the kids all have limited user accounts, because I have at least a certain minimal amount of sanity.

    So I went to install this for him. First surprise (and, in retrospect, warning sign) is that it suggests %USER%\AppData as an installation location, rather than Program Files. Slightly bemused, I changed it to Program Files. It complained about not being able to write to the directory, so I created the Program Files\GameMaker directory for it and tried again. It was more or less happy with that; I noticed it spending a lot of time installing an "Upgrade.zip" file, but I figured that was probably content that could be unlocked if you paid for a higher tier than the free version. Took the shortcut off my desktop and created one that was publically accessible.

    So I got my son in to login to his account and try it out. A small window flashed on the screen and disappeared. Not the most promising start, so I tried running it with admin credentials. Success! Sort of. The program launched and then popped up a dialog saying "Upgrading..." and started unzipping the contents of the Upgrade.zip file. Excuse me? Why wasn't this part of the installation process?

    Eventually that completed, taking about as long as the original installation. OK, time to try running it again. Same small window flashed on the screen and disappeared. Run it as admin again. Now it launches and pops up a window saying "Your version is <x>, the current version is <y>. Do you want to upgrade?". (At this point we also got to choose between the stable and the beta upgrade paths.) Wait, why is the version available for download on your website not the latest stable version? What kind of idiocy is this? Fine, let's upgrade versions (obviously something different from the upgrade we had to do when we ran it the first time). The upgrade took longer than the original installation, both in download and installation time. It also had the wonderfully user-friendly dialog box caption of "Processing Delta", which I had to explain to my son.

    It will probably come as no surprise to anyone that after all this, the program still didn't work without admin credentials. Even after I altered the security settings on the program directory to allow all users full control, it still didn't work without admin credentials. At that point I gave up, uninstalled it, and installed it from my son's account into his AppData directory (repeating all the steps above). Nobody else on the computer can use it, but at least he can.

    Checking afterwards, I was genuinely surprised to find that it was commercial, Windows-only software. The appalling usability screams FOSS (even if your product is for game developers, you shouldn't ignore the UI, especially if you claim that it also "caters to entry-level novices"), and the "let's not install into Program Files because we can't be bothered doing the security properly" bit is a classic trope for Linux software being ported to Windows.



  • The FOSS version/ripoff is called Godot. Honestly, it might be good, who knows.

    And yes, "install in AppData" is programmer code for, "Vista UAC came along and we're too fucking lazy to fix our 20,000 permissions bugs."

    And yes, game developers are the worst and game *tool* developers are the worst of the worst. If you want a laugh, try out RPG Maker.



  • @Scarlet Manuka said:

    , and the "let's not install into Program Files because we can't be bothered doing the security properly" bit is a classic trope for Linux software being ported to Windows.

    I have to disagree with you on that one. I can't think of any case where Windows has more restrictive permissions on programs' files than Linux does. Maybe their installer can't handle spaces or something, but not being able to handle spaces comes from calling system(3) instead of using exec* which is a problem with sloppy C code, not for-Linux code. The two sets share some elements, but neither is a subset of the other.



  • @blakeyrat said:

    game tool developers are the worst of the worst

    If anyone disagrees with blakeyrat, find a family member who doesn't have experience with Valve's Hammer world editor and see how far they can get without reading a guide.

    @blakeyrat said:

    If you want a laugh to waste $69.99, try out RPG Maker.

    FTFY



  • Or, install in AppData might be the [i]proper[/i] way to install in a per-user context. You know, in the manner that Microsoft tells people to author such packages.

    [url="http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/dd765197(v=vs.85).aspx"]Installation Context[/url]



  • @Scarlet Manuka said:

    "let's not install into Program Files

    ... but to c:\Something is what programs ported from unix offten do, because they have more or less problems with spaces in paths. Commercial programs are just as guilty as the open-source ones.

    @Scarlet Manuka said:

    because we can't be bothered doing the security properly"

    Unices (inluding Linux) always had security and were always used from non-administrator accounts, so Unix programs generally do distinguish installation directories accessible to administrator only, data directory where the application may be given permissions and user directories. Not handling permissions correctly is almost exclusively problem of commercial applications, both on Windows (which had no security in the 95/98/ME versions and most people use them as administrators since, so
    before UAC the application could do anything anyway) and the occasional offender on Unix.



  • @Ben L. said:

    If anyone disagrees with blakeyrat, find a family member who doesn't have experience with Valve's Hammer world editor and see how far they can get without reading a guide.

    No idea what you're talking about. I made two shitty counter-strike maps just by hovering my mouse over the icon.



  • @DamienK said:

    Or, install in AppData might be the proper way to install in a per-user context. You know, in the manner that Microsoft tells people to author such packages.

    Installation Context

    That doesn't make it not completely fucking stupid.

    Windows versions since NT make it hard for malware to touch stuff inside %ProgramFiles%, and versions since Vista make it even harder. Stuff inside %APPDATA%, by comparison, is just lying back with its legs spread wide and holding up a huge sign saying Take Me, I'm Yours. And don't even get me started on the effects of shoving tens to hundreds of megabytes of package guts inside what will often turn out to be somebody's roaming profile.

    Dropbox (whose installation unpacks to about 70 MiB) does this as well, and since version 2.x they appear to have removed the setup option that used to let you specify the installation path explicitly. Gives me the shits. At least with Dropbox you can work around it by just grabbing a copy of "%APPDATA%\Dropbox\bin" and uninstalling the thing again; nothing its installer sticks in the HKLM branch of the registry seems to be vital, and Dropbox\bin\dropbox.exe does correctly set up all the HKCU keys and configure Explorer correctly for the user on first run regardless of where it's run from or how many people are running it concurrently.



  • Try Unity. That's what all the cool kids are using.



  • @flabdablet said:

    Windows versions since NT make it hard for malware to touch stuff inside %ProgramFiles%, and versions since Vista make it even harder. Stuff inside %APPDATA%, by comparison, is just lying back with its legs spread wide and holding up a huge sign saying Take Me, I'm Yours.
    Why does this matter? Any program can write to %APPDATA% regardless if everything is installed to Program Files.
    @flabdablet said:
    And don't even get me started on the effects of shoving tens to hundreds of megabytes of package guts inside what will often turn out to be somebody's roaming profile.
    Per-user installs go to %LOCALAPPDATA%, which doesn't roam.



  • @Scarlet Manuka said:

    The appalling usability screams FOSS

    Well, maybe to people whose experience of appallingly unusable software is limited to appallingly unusable FOSS.

    Those of us who have worked in this industry for more than a decade or two, and who come at the thing without an ideological commitment either to promoting FOSS as morally superior or belittling it as the contemptible toenail pickings of unwashed hippies, fully understand that Sturgeon's Law applies to all software, not just FOSS. If you're in any doubt about that, think about the last time you had to have anything to do with any commercial CRM or ERP or personal finance package.



  • @ender said:

    Why does this matter? Any program can write to %APPDATA% regardless if everything is installed to Program Files.
    Sure, but if %APPDATA% contains executables you're actually going to execute as a matter of course, then any dropper can dump a virus or worm or a trojan DLL in there and you'll probably end up running it.@ender said:
    Per-user installs go to %LOCALAPPDATA%, which doesn't roam.
    Maybe somebody should point that out to the Dropbox folks, because that's not where their stuff goes.



  • @Ben L. said:

    @blakeyrat said:
    game tool developers are the worst of the worst

    If anyone disagrees with blakeyrat, find a family member who doesn't have experience with Valve's Hammer world editor and see how far they can get without reading a guide.

    I still haven't managed to get the TF2 dedicated server running.



  • @blakeyrat said:

    The FOSS version/ripoff is called Godot. Honestly, it might be good, who knows.

    From their homepage: "It took a long time but it’s finally ready for everyone."

    From this I deduce that they believe everyone was waiting for Godot. I approve.  

     



  • You know, I filed a bug report about this exact problem. They refused to fix it and closed the report without even countering my explanation. Even a simple "won't fix, too lazy" reply would have been better than just closing the issue without any explanation.

    You can guess what I voted in the following user satisfaction query.



  • @DamienK said:

    Or, install in AppData might be the proper way to install in a per-user context. You know, in the manner that Microsoft tells people to author such packages.

    Installation Context

    Maybe I'm missing something but I see nothing in there which actually says that per-user intalls should go into %APPDATA%.  Microsoft's official "Certified for Microsoft Windows" rules specifically say: "The application should install to the Program Files folder by default."

     



  • @Ben L. said:

    @blakeyrat said:
    game tool developers are the worst of the worst
    If anyone disagrees with blakeyrat, find a family member who doesn't have experience with Valve's Hammer world editor and see how far they can get without reading a guide.

    I like the Skyrim Creation Kit myself. It's not that bad, other than crashing near instantly unless you turn sound off in some ini file (?!) and having a bunch of noob traps (flagging certain object types as changed just for looking at them; spells randomly being set to 0 AoE and hitting yourself as a result) and undocumented features (gray face feature). Sure, it takes a few months to figure out how to make a good mod -- but that only keeps the casuals away and prevents them from clogging up the list with trash; people who actually care about making mods will persist.

    I do recall lots of QQ about the Starcraft 2 Galaxy Editor: apparently it was too hard to add things like missiles because they were three different object types. Because tons of kids want to "make games" but when they see what the guts of a game look like, they rage quit and cry on the forums.

    Nooobs.



  • @Scarlet Manuka said:

    So I went to install this for him. First surprise (and, in retrospect, warning sign) is that it suggests %USER%\AppData as an installation location, rather than Program Files.

    I seem to remember Google Chrome doing this too.

    @Scarlet Manuka said:
    Slightly bemused, I changed it to Program Files.

    You changed its installation path to a location with drastically different permissions and you expected it to work just fine? You are TRWTF.

    @flabdablet said:
    Sure, but if %APPDATA% contains executables you're actually going to execute as a matter of course, then any dropper can dump a virus or worm or a trojan DLL in there and you'll probably end up running it.

    If malicious code gets the ability to modify the files in your user profile, you're fucked anyway.



  • @anotherusername said:

    @Scarlet Manuka said:
    So I went to install this for him. First surprise (and, in retrospect, warning sign) is that it suggests %USER%\AppData as an installation location, rather than Program Files.

    I seem to remember Google Chrome doing this too.

    Chrome used to install into %APPDATA% but I don't know if that is still the case, I don't use it any more. The more annoying point was that the Chrome installer didn't even offer the option to change the location.  However, thanks to a couple of obsure barely-documented command line switches I was able to copy everything to a more proper location (<font face="courier new,courier">C:\Program Files(x86)\Google\Chrome</font>) with only user data stored in %APPDATA% and everything worked just fine.@anotherusername said:
    @Scarlet Manuka said:
    Slightly bemused, I changed it to Program Files.

    You changed its installation path to a location with drastically different permissions and you expected it to work just fine? You are TRWTF.

    Every application I currently have on my computer installs to  <font face="courier new,courier">C:\Program Files </font> just fine, including crap like iTunes and Java and shitty open sores programs like Firefox and VLC.

     

     



  • @anotherusername said:

    If malicious code gets the ability to modify the files in your user profile, you're fucked anyway.

    Well no, not really. Your user profile is the least protected part of any Windows installation because you need to be able to write stuff in there without any kind of elevated privileges - that's kind of the point of it.

    Prickware installed inside your own profile can be intensely irritating, and may damage your own documents and whatnot enough that you need to restore them from backups, but it's not going to be able to ruin your whole Windows installation or rootkit you unless you go out of your way to run it or its installer with elevated privileges. As long as it's never had those, then in extremis you can always get rid of it just by wiping your profile, which is a lot faster than reinstalling the OS.



  • @flabdablet said:

    Try Unity. That's what all the cool kids are using.

    Oh God, before I followed the link I thought you meant the Canonical desktop environment and about ripped you a new one..



  • @flabdablet said:

    @Scarlet Manuka said:
    The appalling usability screams FOSS

    Well, maybe to people whose experience of appallingly unusable software is limited to appallingly unusable FOSS.

    Those of us who have worked in this industry for more than a decade or two, and who come at the thing without an ideological commitment either to promoting FOSS as morally superior or belittling it as the contemptible toenail pickings of unwashed hippies, fully understand that Sturgeon's Law applies to all software, not just FOSS. If you're in any doubt about that, think about the last time you had to have anything to do with any commercial CRM or ERP or personal finance package.

    I'll reiterate: of course there's bad commercial software. It's just that there's almost no good FOSS software. Commercial might be 80% bad (WARNING: asspull) but FOSS is 99% bad.



  • @flabdablet said:

    @anotherusername said:
    If malicious code gets the ability to modify the files in your user profile, you're fucked anyway.

    Well no, not really. Your user profile is the least protected part of any Windows installation because you need to be able to write stuff in there without any kind of elevated privileges - that's kind of the point of it.

    Prickware installed inside your own profile can be intensely irritating, and may damage your own documents and whatnot enough that you need to restore them from backups, but it's not going to be able to ruin your whole Windows installation or rootkit you unless you go out of your way to run it or its installer with elevated privileges. As long as it's never had those, then in extremis you can always get rid of it just by wiping your profile, which is a lot faster than reinstalling the OS.

    +1



  • @El_Heffe said:

    However, thanks to a couple of obsure barely-documented command line switches I was able to copy everything to a more proper location (<font face="courier new,courier">C:\Program Files(x86)\Google\Chrome</font>) with only user data stored in %APPDATA% and everything worked just fine.

    Ha ha, on Linux Chrome refuses to run as root but you can simply set the data dir to /root/.chrome and it works.

    What's more annoying is that on Linux it insists on installing itself to /opt/google/chrome. This pisses me off for a few reasons:

    1. If not for Chrome, I wouldn't even have an /opt directory
    2. You can't run multiple versions in-parallel. I like to have the option, but Chrome insists that everything live in /opt/google/chrome
    3. Hard-coded paths? Srsly, Google? Fuck you guys


  • @flabdablet said:

    @anotherusername said:
    If malicious code gets the ability to modify the files in your user profile, you're fucked anyway.

    Well no, not really. Your user profile is the least protected part of any Windows installation because you need to be able to write stuff in there without any kind of elevated privileges - that's kind of the point of it.

    Prickware installed inside your own profile can be intensely irritating, and may damage your own documents and whatnot enough that you need to restore them from backups, but it's not going to be able to ruin your whole Windows installation or rootkit you unless you go out of your way to run it or its installer with elevated privileges. As long as it's never had those, then in extremis you can always get rid of it just by wiping your profile, which is a lot faster than reinstalling the OS.

    So what you're saying is, if badware gets installed in your user profile, it can do the exact same thing as the badware that installed it. It can mess with the stuff stored in your user profile.

    We're saying the same thing here.


  • Winner of the 2016 Presidential Election

    @morbiuswilters said:

    Ha ha, on Linux Chrome refuses to run as root but you can simply set the data dir to /root/.chrome and it works.

    Ha ha, this gun has a safety but if I just use a screwdriver and a nail file* it works fine without it.



    * I have no idea how one would actually go about removing the safety from a gun.



  • LocalAppData (Or perhaps, LocalAppData\Programs) is a perfectly fine place to install Per-User programs, and in fact is central to Dual-Mode installations packages (Which is what the previous link was trying to show, but I didn't see it spelled out explicitly)

     http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd408068%28VS.85%29.aspx#development_guidelines

    "When a user installs the dual-purpose package on Windows 7 or Windows Server 2008 R2 using the per-user context, these components are saved in the Programs folder of the current user (for example at %LocalAppData%\Programs) and can be accessed only by that user."

    Chrome does this (More or less, don't have Chrome installed to verify, might still use the Roaming AppData). I guess the malware could replace Chrome.exe with an infected version. But the Malware could also just mess with your shortcut and point it to the infected Chrome.exe in my documents. Doesn't really gain you much you can't get otherwise. And I guess the Malware completely breaks on machines that don't know (one of) the target programs in LocalAppData?

     

     



  • @El_Heffe said:

    Chrome used to install into %APPDATA% but I don't know if that is still the case, I don't use it any more.
    Current rules on Windows seem to be that if you run the Chrome installer in such a way that it has write access to %ProgramFiles% it will put Chrome there, and if you don't it will put it in your profile. Can't remember offhand whether profile installs now go to %LOCALAPPDATA% or still clog %APPDATA%.



  • @morbiuswilters said:

    Oh God, before I followed the link I thought you meant the Canonical desktop environment and about ripped you a new one..
    If I were using the Canonical desktop environment I'd already have a new one. The only positive thing that can be said about that particular UI is that it isn't the Gnome 3 Shell.


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @flabdablet said:

    The only positive thing that can be said about that particular UI is that it isn't the Gnome 3 Shell.
    It's also better than CDE, NeWS and IRIX Interactive Desktop. I've used all three, and I'm very glad that they're functionally gone these days.



  • Processing Delta

    Anyone care to explain? Thanks



  • @ubersoldat said:

    Processing Delta

    Anyone care to explain? Thanks

    Processing Delta was a short-lived sitcom from the mid-80s starring Delta Burke as the sassy new manager of a computer lab full of socially-awkward nerds in a large, un-named corporation. Most of the jokes revolved around how she wasn't really familiar with technology or how the employees in her all-male department didn't know how to relate to the outspoken diva. But even though they were from different worlds, they learn to work together in harmony.


    It was cancelled after three episodes.



  • @flabdablet said:

    if you run the Chrome installer in such a way that it has write access to %ProgramFiles% it will put Chrome there, and if you don't it will put it in your profile.
    I don't think that's true -- at least not the last time I installed Chrome.  I have full access to everything on my home PC and Chrome defaulted to putting itself in the user profile. Maybe they finally reaized they were doing something stupid and changed it@flabdablet said:
    Can't remember offhand whether profile installs now go to %LOCALAPPDATA% or still clog %APPDATA%.
    The last time I installed Chrome was at least a year ago, but now that I think about it I seem to remember it putting everything, including all the executables, in %LOCALAPPDATA% by default.

    Apparenlty the excuse for this was to allow people to install Chrome on computers where they don't have proper permission to install into the normal location.  Which I personally find to be a WTF -- if you don't have (or can't get) permssion to install into  <font face="courier new,courier">C:\Program Files</font>  then it typcially means it's not your computer and you're not supposed to be installing anything anyway.



  • @morbiuswilters said:

    @ubersoldat said:
    Processing Delta

    Anyone care to explain? Thanks

    Processing Delta was a short-lived sitcom from the mid-80s starring Delta Burke as the sassy new manager of a computer lab full of socially-awkward nerds in a large, un-named corporation. Most of the jokes revolved around how she wasn't really familiar with technology or how the employees in her all-male department didn't know how to relate to the outspoken diva. But even though they were from different worlds, they learn to work together in harmony.


    It was cancelled after three episodes.

    Not as bad as The Paul Reiser Show which was cancelled after two episodes.

    Seriously, WTF -- if a show is so bad it is cancelled after two epsisodes, how does it even get on the air in the first place.

    Next up -- The Delta Burke Paul Reiser Show which will be cancelled before someone thinks of it.


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @morbiuswilters said:

    Processing Delta was a short-lived sitcom from the mid-80s starring Delta Burke as the sassy new manager of a computer lab full of socially-awkward nerds in a large, un-named corporation. Most of the jokes revolved around how she wasn't really familiar with technology or how the employees in her all-male department didn't know how to relate to the outspoken diva. But even though they were from different worlds, they learn to work together in harmony.
    It sounds something like IT Crowd or Big Bang Theory, except without the “successful” part.



  • @joe.edwards said:

    I have no idea how one would actually go about removing the safety from a gun.
    If it's an Apple iGun, you can't. In fact, you have to be careful not to use the gun on a humid day, or the moisture sensors will activate, and you won't ever be able to get Apple to repair it. If you're using ggun, you're allowed to remove the safety, but you have to recompile, and if you have the wrong version of glibc, it'll go off in your hand. MS Gun is pretty good now, but everyone is still using the outdated version where the safety was labeled backwards and it only worked with MS Bullets, which were made primarily of clay. Google's got a free replacement now called Musket. It's got about 50% of the features, but that's good enough for most users.



  • @dkf said:

    @morbiuswilters said:
    Processing Delta was a short-lived sitcom from the mid-80s starring Delta Burke as the sassy new manager of a computer lab full of socially-awkward nerds in a large, un-named corporation. Most of the jokes revolved around how she wasn't really familiar with technology or how the employees in her all-male department didn't know how to relate to the outspoken diva. But even though they were from different worlds, they learn to work together in harmony.
    It sounds something like IT Crowd or Big Bang Theory
    Yes, those are other examples of terrible shows.



  • @El_Heffe said:

    Not as bad as The Paul Reiser Show which was cancelled after two episodes.

    Seriously, WTF -- if a show is so bad it is cancelled after two epsisodes, how does it even get on the air in the first place.

    Next up -- The Delta Burke Paul Reiser Show which will be cancelled before someone thinks of it.

    List of television series cancelled before first episode finished airing.



  • @morbiuswilters said:

    @El_Heffe said:

    Not as bad as The Paul Reiser Show which was cancelled after two episodes.

    Seriously, WTF -- if a show is so bad it is cancelled after two epsisodes, how does it even get on the air in the first place.

    Next up -- The Delta Burke Paul Reiser Show which will be cancelled before someone thinks of it.

    List of television series cancelled before first episode finished airing.

    From the list of shows cancelled after one episode:

    Heil Honey I'm Home! (September 30, 1990)
    British TV's Galaxy comedy that spoofed American sitcoms of the 1950s and 1960s by featuring caricatures of Adolf Hitler and Eva Braun who live in matrimonial bliss until they become neighbours to a Jewish couple.
    I don't know about you guys, but that sounds like a fucking winner to me.


  • @bstorer said:

    From the list of shows cancelled after one episode:

    Heil Honey I'm Home! (September 30, 1990)
    British TV's Galaxy comedy that spoofed American sitcoms of the 1950s and 1960s by featuring caricatures of Adolf Hitler and Eva Braun who live in matrimonial bliss until they become neighbours to a Jewish couple.
    I don't know about you guys, but that sounds like a fucking winner to me.

    No shit. Damn, Britain, you get one good TV show in your entire history and you cancel it after a single episode? How many fucking years did Are You Being Served? disgrace your televisions?



  • @morbiuswilters said:

    List of television series cancelled before first episode finished airing.

    The worst sitcom ever made, My Mother the Car ran for 30 episodes. Somehow.



  • @morbiuswilters said:

    How many fucking years did Are You Being Served? disgrace your televisions?
    I disagree. Britain has always been way ahead of us in the all-important television categories of mincing gays and puns about an old woman's vagina.



  • @blakeyrat said:

    @morbiuswilters said:
    List of television series cancelled before first episode finished airing.

    The worst sitcom ever made, My Mother the Car ran for 30 episodes. Somehow.

    But it did give us the "Lovematic Grandpa", so there's that.



  • @bstorer said:

    Heil Honey I'm Home! (September 30, 1990)

    British TV's Galaxy comedy that spoofed American sitcoms of the 1950s and 1960s by featuring caricatures of Adolf Hitler and Eva Braun who live in matrimonial bliss until they become neighbours to a Jewish couple.
    I don't know about you guys, but that sounds like a fucking winner to me.

    I thought so too.

    http://forums.thedailywtf.com/forums/p/25493/276214.aspx

     



  • @El_Heffe said:

    http://forums.thedailywtf.com/forums/p/25493/276214.aspx

    TRWTF is that Blakey thinks Kubrick can do no wrong. I was a huge fan of his, until I saw Eyes Wide Shit. As soon as it was finished playing, my first thought was "You know, it's probably a good thing he died so that no more movies like that could ever be made."


  • Winner of the 2016 Presidential Election

    @morbiuswilters said:

    @El_Heffe said:
    http://forums.thedailywtf.com/forums/p/25493/276214.aspx

    TRWTF is that Blakey thinks Kubrick can do no wrong. I was a huge fan of his, until I saw Eyes Wide Shit. As soon as it was finished playing, my first thought was "You know, it's probably a good thing he died so that no more movies like that could ever be made."


    Are you talking about the softcore porn flick? Yeah it didn't do much for me either.



  • @joe.edwards said:

    Are you talking about the softcore porn flick? Yeah it didn't do much for me either.

    Soft-core porn would have been better. The sex in that movie was unerotic (that was the point) and mostly it just revolved around Tom Cruise being creepy and Nicole Kidman looking sad.



  • @El_Heffe said:

    @morbiuswilters said:

    @ubersoldat said:
    Processing Delta

    Anyone care to explain? Thanks

    Processing Delta was a short-lived sitcom from the mid-80s starring Delta Burke as the sassy new manager of a computer lab full of socially-awkward nerds in a large, un-named corporation. Most of the jokes revolved around how she wasn't really familiar with technology or how the employees in her all-male department didn't know how to relate to the outspoken diva. But even though they were from different worlds, they learn to work together in harmony.


    It was cancelled after three episodes.

    Not as bad as The Paul Reiser Show which was cancelled after two episodes.

    Seriously, WTF -- if a show is so bad it is cancelled after two epsisodes, how does it even get on the air in the first place.

    Next up -- The Delta Burke Paul Reiser Show which will be cancelled before someone thinks of it.

    Reminds me of the Clerks animated series - which aired two episodes, out of order, and was canceled.



  • @morbiuswilters said:

    @joe.edwards said:
    Are you talking about the softcore porn flick? Yeah it didn't do much for me either.

    Soft-core porn would have been better. The sex in that movie was unerotic (that was the point) and mostly it just revolved around Tom Cruise being creepy and Nicole Kidman looking sad.



    Well, it was made not too long before their divorce, so I would imagine that maybe some lingering real-life issues filtered through the production.



  • @morbiuswilters said:

    List of television series cancelled before first episode finished airing.

    You can watch them all on the "Cancelled Network"   (wouldn't be suprised) 

     


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to What the Daily WTF? was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.