When Microsoft launched the (let's face it, baroque) complexity that is Windows Installer (MSI), we didn't get the WiX Toolset, instead we got an expensive proprietary profiling tool for capturing before/after snapshots, and an entry-level version bundled on the Windows 2000 CD which didn't really solve anybody's problem. No suprises then that the MSI format didn't immediately take over, and Microsoft would presume all the way to Intune that their customers were deploying MSI packages when mostly we weren't.<p>I always wondered what would have happened if the WiX Toolset had been available from the start, and I like to compare the more organic success of the Microsoft Deployment Toolkit (MDT) being more open and hackable as an example. I guess the time just wasn't right.
To those who complain about the poor documentation: that's the whole point. The maintainer offers consulting services ($5,000/yr.). It is in his interest that users should need his help.<p>It's worth it for commercial customers. It's a fair business model for an Open Source project.
If you only need the basics, you can also use GNOME's msitools[0], which use the same XML format as WiX but don't require Windows to build the MSI package.<p>[0] <a href="https://wiki.gnome.org/msitools" rel="nofollow">https://wiki.gnome.org/msitools</a>
I have to agree with others here. It's better to use Wix as a thin layer on top of Windows Installer but the documentation is very, very poor.<p>I spent a week of trial and error to create an installer just to find out that I had several installations of my app because of some misconfigured xml document from testing. A <i>nightmare</i> to uninstall to say the least.<p>I <i>highly</i> recommend to test your installers inside a VM or you'll screw up your system.<p>Also good luck if you want custom behaviour from the installer. The documentation for that is far worse than it is for the standard msi installer.
For those like me (I never used Windows) who do not know WiX; <a href="https://wixtoolset.org/" rel="nofollow">https://wixtoolset.org/</a>.
Looks like <a href="https://www.firegiant.com/blog/2024/4/5/looking-back-at-twenty-years-in-the-wix-toolset/" rel="nofollow">https://www.firegiant.com/blog/2024/4/5/looking-back-at-twen...</a> is the better link?
Twenty years maintaining, but the quality of the documentation doesn’t show that. Making an installer in WiX 4 with only one or two fancy things required 3-4 days’ worth of trial-and-error, and searching the WiX sources to figure things out. The docs barely tell you anything.