Last week at Build 2021, Microsoft announced the general availability of its Windows Package Manager, also called WinGet. WinGet 1.0 arrives one year after its announcement at Build 2020, and the subsequent controversy in which a developer alleged that Microsoft stole his product and Microsoft subsequently ignored that complaint.
“A package manager is designed to help you save time and frustration,” Microsoft’s Demitrius Nelon explained when the firm announced its plans for WinGet. “Essentially, it is a set of software tools that help you automate the process of getting software on your machine. You specify which apps you want installed, and it does the work of finding the latest version (or the exact one you specified) and installing it on your machine.”
Sign up for our new free newsletter to get three time-saving tips each Friday — and get free copies of Paul Thurrott's Windows 11 and Windows 10 Field Guides (normally $9.99) as a special welcome gift!
"*" indicates required fields
Put another way, WinGet is basically a way to automate the installation and updating of Windows applications that you obtain from outside the Microsoft Store. That is, instead of searching for the software you need on the web and then finding the right page and right software version to install, you can automate this process with WinGet. The only issue for most people? It’s a command-line tool.
WinGet 1.0 will soon be integrated into all supported versions of Windows 10, and IT admins can configure whether this software will be installed via Group Policy. But if you’re interested in getting started now with WinGet, you can download it from GitHub or directly with this link.
I will be covering the Windows Package Manager (WinGet) in the next major edition of the Windows 10 Field Guide as well.
dftf
<p>Can you really steal <em>anything </em>from Linux? Isn’t the whole-point it’s all open-source… I can’t imagine any of the package-managers are patented or anything. I’d highly-doubt <em>winget </em>uses any source-code from Linux or UNIX though; the most you may find are command similarities.</p>
bitterseeds
<p>You’re right, it’s usually MSFT causing cancer. heh.</p>
dftf
<p>While this is a nice addition, it’s not something around 90% or-so of the typical Windows userbase will ever use.</p><p><br></p><p>While I’m not sure Paul has covered it, a number of sites have recently reported that a major revamp to the Microsoft Store is coming, and one major change is that Win32 apps will (finally!) be allowed in; no-more having to create a "Modern UI" (UWP) version. Both .MSI and .EXE (scriptable only) installer formats will also be admitted. So, <em>finally, </em>this means all the most-common web-browsers, like <em>Brave, Firefox, Google Chrome, Opera </em>and <em>Vivaldi, </em>can all enter the Store, along with loads of other apps.</p><p><br></p><p>Only took them, what… nearly six years to finally decide to do the obvious!</p>
dftf
<p>You won’t be able to change the install directory for Store installs, no: they’ll go into the default the developer specifies.</p><p><br></p><p>You know, like how it works on Android and iOS.</p><p><br></p><p>If you want to install to your own directory preferences, continue to obtain the installers manually.</p><p><br></p><p>But for the vast majority of users, having more apps in the Store is a good thing.</p><p><br></p><p>And no, there won’t be any listing charge for any app that is free. (And I think Microsoft recently said they were lowering the cut they take for all paid apps in the Store to 12%…)</p>
dftf
<p><em>"Granted I’m not the target audience …"</em></p><p><br></p><p>No, so just continue to install your apps manually. But things like <em>winget</em> and the <em>Microsoft Store</em> will help your average-user to avoid downloading apps from dodgy, third-party sites.</p><p><br></p><p><em>"… there could be less sophisticated users who could be running out of free space on C: but want to install some new software package. Would they really need to uninstall something else first even if they had a perfectly usable D:, E: or Z: drive?"</em></p><p><br></p><p>(1) Right now in Windows 10 you can go to Start > Settings > System > Storage and click "Change where new content is saved". Then, under "New apps will save to", you can pick a different drive. I’m not-sure if this will affect where Win32 apps install to, once they enter the store, but maybe.</p><p><br></p><p>(2) Also, isn’t the "Storage Spaces" feature designed for the scenario you describe? If your "C" drive is low on space, you can "pool" multiple drives together to act as one.</p><p><br></p><p><em>"Is there any reason other than cheapness that MSFT hasn’t already put as many FOSS titles in its Store as possible?"</em></p><p><br></p><p>Because until now Microsoft had two requirements for an app to go in the Store: (1) it had to be in UWP (Modern UI) format, not Win32; and (2) it had to be distributed in the MSIX installer-format (no MSI or EXE installers). This was largely a holdover from when they actually had their own Phone OS: hence why they’re ditching the requirement in future.</p><p><br></p><p><em>"As for a mere 12%, there’ll still be lots of ISVs who’ll hold out for 0%. Why should they let MSFT take 12% if they already have distribution channels which are working for them which don’t involve MSFT?"</em></p><p><br></p><p>That’s up to them… the <em>Microsoft Store</em> could offer some app discoverability, and some devices might be locked-down to only install apps from the Store. But sure, developers can host the app-installer on their own website and bypass the Store as they please. Isn’t it nice to have choice?</p>
dftf
<p>I don’t see any inconsistency: just because I mention an advantage of <em>winget</em>, it still remains the case that the same benefit — i.e. apps come from what should be a vetted, safe repository, not random download-sites — is also true for the <em>Microsoft Store.</em></p><p><br></p><p>And because the <em>Microsoft Store </em>is GUI-based, not CLI-based, it will be the option most-users go to.</p><p><br></p><p>You seem to be under the impression I’ve somehow said <em>winget </em>shouldn’t be added to Windows 10, hence you flagging me up for me stating a benefit. But I’ve said clearly I think it should be added, as some users will use it — it’s just not going to become some major "killer-feature" in my view, that’s all.</p><p><br></p><p>I mean, likewise, I think it’s great Microsoft have support to use a Linux terminal and, soon, run GUI Linux apps in Windows 10. But, again, it’s not something the vast majority of the userbase will ever use (let-alone probably even know exists, or care that it does).</p>
dftf
<p><em>"… That is up to each project to implement, probably not a priority."</em></p><p><br></p><p>It’s not that it isn’t a priority for some developers to put their apps into the <em>Microsoft Store</em>, it’s that Microsoft’s rules have been that you must repackage in the MSIX installer format, and submitted apps should be in UWP format, not Win32. Once Win32 apps are allowed as-standard, and MSI and EXE installer formats permitted, this should change.</p><p><br></p><p><em>"Can you imagine the uproar, if you were suddenly downloading Microsoft Gimp, Microsoft MariaDB, Microsoft Darktable, Microsoft Audacity?"</em></p><p><br></p><p>Well, right-now if I go into the <em>Microsoft Store </em>and do a search for "LibreOffice" I can see <em>LibreOffice Vanilla </em>for £8.39, offered by "CIB Software GmbH"; <em>LibraOffice</em>, by "varapps", for £2.29; and <em>LibroOffice</em> by "MYTA4444" for £2.39.</p><p><br></p><p>Similarly, <em>Audacity </em>is on-offer from "PegasusApps" for £3.29, "Blusky Software Inc" for free, and "Audiotool" for £4.19.</p><p><br></p><p><em>Notepad++ </em>is unofficially hosted for-free by "Hauke Hasselberg"; as is "7-Zip" (as well as by "EcomQ"). </p><p><br></p><p><em>GIMP </em>is hosted for free by "Yellow Elephant Productions" and "CoolLeGet Produtions", or for £2.89 by "MYTA4444".</p><p><br></p><p><em>Blender </em>is actually hosted officially; about one of the only ones I can find that is!</p><p><br></p><p>I’m not sure the current situation is much better… loads of apps being hosted by unofficial sources, or people reselling what should be free software by changing the name and branding!</p>
dftf
<p>And no, of course I’m not suggesting to scrap it. It’s a useful feature.</p><p><br></p><p>My point is just that it’s a "geek" feature that most users will never use or encounter.</p><p><br></p><p>And to keep Windows feeling fresh and likes it’s evolving, they also need to add more features or UI improvements that most users will actually notice.</p>
alistat
<p>In Linux, most people use it because they copy paste commands from online guides. </p><p>For both the author and the reader, it’s a lot easier to copy paste a command than follow a full pipeline of steps with clicks, menu selections, tab navigations etc</p>
dftf
<p>Won’t most admins already be using an app-deployment solution like SCCM already? Maybe winget could take over in some cases (e.g. a small business where they get Windows Updates direct from Microsoft, rather than in-house via something like WSUS). But there are many companies who still image machines in an offline fashion using either a dedicated LAN, or via USB flash-pens — "winget" needs an Internet-connection, so won’t be of much-use in those scenarios.</p>
dftf
<p>Maybe, but who knows… it’s not uncommon for Microsoft to have multiple software or solution offerings which have similar functionality.</p><p><br></p><p>I mean, assume your Windows 10 device right-now is running 20H2 and you want 21H1 on there, but when you go to <em>Windows Update </em>it’s not offered. Is the correct tool to use the "Media Creation Tool" and pick the "Upgrade this PC now" option, or to use the "Windows 10 Update Assistant", which essentially also does the same task?</p>
dftf
<p>You could likely have done this before now with the old methods:</p><p><br></p><p>In <em>PowerShell</em>, run <strong>Get-appxpackage</strong> to see what’s installed; once you find the internal name, add it to the command: <strong>Get-appxpackage -allusers <internalnamehere> | Remove-AppxPackage</strong></p><p><br></p><p>Or it might be a feature you can turn-off in an admin <em>Command Prompt </em>via: <strong>DISM /online /Disable-Feature /FeatureName:<insertnamehere></strong></p>
dftf
<p>It’s probably not called Cortana, internally, that’s why. You need to look at the "PackageFullName" line. It’ll be something like "Microsoft.549981C3F5F10_2.2005.5739.0_x64__8wekyb3d8bbwe".</p><p><br></p><p>If you really can’t accept it installed whatsoever, you could also consider using NTLite to rip it out of a Windows 10 install-image and then install a PC using that image (or use DISM and target the offline .WIM file)</p>
dftf
<p>The GUI version is called "Microsoft Store" ;)</p>
thatoneguy723
<p>It seems as this is mainly a thing for administrators at a school or a workplace, all they have to do is type in the commands they need on WinGet and it installs a program automatically without having to install them on each and every workstation through the web in a school/workplace environment.</p><p><br></p><p>it would also be good for the more tech savvy windows users.</p>
dftf
<p>Some of the more tech-savvy Windows users will likely want to (1) change installation options for an app, i.e. a "custom install" or (2) choose a different partition, junction-point or physical-disk to install the app onto. For them, "winget" may be limiting if it doesn’t allow anything beyond the installation defaults</p>
dftf
<p><em>"Neither .EXEs nor .DLLs under my %APPDATA% …"</em></p><p><br></p><p>Some apps do install into the %AppData% folder.</p><p><br></p><p>If you’re not an administrator on your machine, then <em>Google Chrome </em>(the .EXE "web installer", not the .MSI version) will install <em>Chrome </em>into the AppData\Local\Google\Chrome folder; and <em>Spotify </em>installs into AppData\Roaming\Spotify if I recall right.</p><p><br></p><p>Apps clearly <em>shouldn’t </em>do this, as it breaks convention; but it’s how they get-around non-admin users. The correct thing is that the install should fail and say "you do not have admin rights, install cannot continue"… but that would mean they lose a potential user or customer.</p>
dftf
<p><em>"The concept is brilliant, but I would prefer to see a GUI"</em></p><p><br></p><p>It’s called the <em>Microsoft Store</em>.</p><p><br></p><p>Alternatively, go into Notepad, create a file with a .BAT extension and then simply add a line for each app you want installed, for example:</p><p><em>winget install firefox</em></p><p><em>winget install adobe-reader</em></p><p><em>winget install audacity</em></p>
dftf
<p>Some articles online say a major revamp to the Microsoft Store is due soon, relaxing the "UWP" UI and MSIX-only installer formats, to allow Win32 apps in, alongside .MSI and .EXE installers. Hopefully as part of this revamp, they’ll delete-out a lot of the current junk!</p>