O_O 338 for windows weights 200 less than 334, for having troubles seems I've tried to install the latest and failed.
And both macosx and linux are heavier than all windows - doesn't it mean that there is a lack of something in windows version? Or vice versa it's written better and because of it lighter?

Yes, I agree. It would be wonderful if the installation was >200MB smaller but I think that a significant portion of the program is missing and will not install.

Not sure that for applications smaller=better prefer having all parts and normal sized ssd. After writing this I've realized that SideFX team are most probably not here today, and tomorrow etc. Think they will fix it and add a missed part of Houdini when will find time, it was just unexpectedly.
Another thing bugs me now - I was sure for Windows he should be heavier, rather than for Linux. Hm hm. In case that I'm not under Linux and not going to touch him any visible future I think how interesting it should be to switch on the same computer from Windows to Linux if something like this happens.

i installed, and can not open. it should be a failed build.

Ryu Ku
Not sure that for applications smaller=better

Its almost always better; reliable indicator of mastery.
Disk storage is a non-issue anymore, but internet tariffs are still expensive in many parts of the world.

Seems not only me check if broken is broken or only looks so.
These differencies started chain in me - could be interesting to have another OS on laptop.
One more thing to try to not think about.

Hi, cpb,
You wrote during my writing. Almost sure haven't seen your post before it. Faster.

reliable indicator of mastery

- You mean - the better programming - the less weight or what?
I thought - the more complex programm - the bigger.
How Houdini working depends on internet? O_O