Program Files as a default installation folder

[dima69]

Hi everybody.
I develop a commercial MSAccess application. Until now, the default folder for my installation was "Program Files" - because this is the "convention al" way. However, I discovered that Vista makes the life hard while installing to Program Files. The application must be "run as administrator" to run at all, while in any other folder it works OK without the administrator permission. So I ask myself - why do I stick to the "convention al" way ? Installing to C:\MyAppName seems to be much more convinient.
I know many softwares don't use "Program Files" as default.
So my question is if there are any drawbacks in NOT installing into "Program Files" ?

[RedSon]

Hi everybody.
I develop a commercial MSAccess application. Until now, the default folder for my installation was "Program Files" - because this is the "convention al" way. However, I discovered that Vista makes the life hard while installing to Program Files. The application must be "run as administrator" to run at all, while in any other folder it works OK without the administrator permission. So I ask myself - why do I stick to the "convention al" way ? Installing to C:\MyAppName seems to be much more convinient.
I know many softwares don't use "Program Files" as default.
So my question is if there are any drawbacks in NOT installing into "Program Files" ?

The only drawback that I can think of is that by not installing the "convention al" way you may be limited to the system libraries that you can call into. But I have no proof of that nor can I point you to a website that says that. Sorry.