That said, his point about installing programs is spot on for people from the Windows world. It makes sense in a UNIX-y way, but it's totally counterintuitive if you've come from Windows. I found it odd the first time, then grew to love it.
Mac: The application is a file. To get rid of it, just delete it like a file. Windows: You have to run a program to install it, and run a program to uninstall it. Do it any other way and
The mac paradigm is a bit leaky although, with .pkg files and what not. The .dmg distribution method is a bit annoying, but it allows developers to add fancy graphics when people install their programs.
In my 2 months of experience with the Mac, I have found that the Mac is very appealing when it's new. It's beautiful, but sometimes it feels like Steve Jobs prefers form over function a bit too much.
So, the reason the Mac approach seems strange is because it makes the whole install/uninstall concept just go away altogether. Perhaps a suitable HN metaphor: it eliminates an onion.
Ubuntu: Synaptic or "sudo apt-get install xyz" Fedora: "yum install xyz"
Certainly don't see any goofy dragging app files around here.
Using a package manager or manually grabbing the files and building it IS basically like dragging files to an Applications folder.
You have all your files for an app in one known spot. That's all there is (excluding environment variables). What is non-unixy is installing a bunch of garbage into a registry (did I mention I hate registries?).
These OS X / UNIX techniques compared to Windows' "download an EXECUTABLE that does all the installation for you" is like night and day.
Mac does due to all the reasons listed by the article.
Win sucks (at least circa XP, I haven't touched Vista) in that each installer is often still inconsistent and unique in its own little annoying ways. Plus you have issues with apps putting shared files all over, in different directories, so uninstall is a mess. Mac install is better in that regard, since uninstall usually means dragging the .app to the trash.