Thank you for your review
$995 00
Email me when discounted: 
InstallBuilder allows you to create easy-to-use installers for Mac OS X, Linux (x86/PPC), Solaris, AIX, HP-UX, FreeBSD, and Windows applications. The generated installer for an application has native look and feel and no external dependencies. BitRock installers can be run in GUI, text, and unattended modes. It has free, fully functional licenses for open source projects.

What's New

Version 9.0.2:

Note: Although Finder indicates that this is version @@INSTALLBUILDER_VERSION@@, the application's About dialog indicates that it is version 9.0.2.

  • Improved Gtk mode to properly run in systems without the recently deprecated Pangox library
  • Improved Java detection on Unix
  • Improved German translation
  • Fixed CDROM build mode not properly more...


OS X 10.2 or later

Similar Software

Open Comparison
Suggest Other Similar Software
Leave a Review

InstallBuilder User Discussion

Nobody has reviewed or commented on this app yet. Add your own comment and get a discussion going!
Sort by: Time | Smiles
Stephen_Fry Member IconReview+79

The only way any OSX app should be distributed is within a DMG file. A good coded app doesn't need to put files everywhere. Hell, even the Apple programmers guideline says you shouldnt.

But I guess for Windows this can be a handy app for devs.
Said that, this app is way to expensive. I mean, there are dozens of free tools to do the same (Xcode has one for assembling pkg files)

Reply1 reply
Version 8.0.0

I would also like to point out that every 5 star review and 'positive' counter-reply has been written be new members with only one review.

John Walker Member IconReview+2
John Walker

The first thing everyone looks at is price before downloading it. You would think that $795 is absurd. When I first looked at it, even I thought it was too expensive. But, it's free to try the demo, so why not?

The installation time might be long enough to pop a small bag of popcorn, but it's worth the wait and you only have to do it once. It's actually pretty fast after that.

Opening it, I find that there are many features in this tool that are typical among installers that are necessary (ReadMe, License, etc.). There are also things like an uninstaller which many other programs that create installers never include. The average user can be frustrated removing something that does not have an uninstaller by means of traditional drag-and-drop to the trash/recycle bin, so it's great to include one in your install. Some installers provide optional splash screens, this one does, too. It has everything you will need.

You might not only get this for the features, but you might also get it for the compatibility of the installs. The compatibility is impressive. It's not just Mac and Windows, but many other operating systems. It's great that this supports some of the less popular operating systems just as much as the popular operating systems. I haven't seen many other programs with such large compatibility.

The reason why I don't want to buy this is because I will never need it, but, if you need the compatibility and/or features, this product is worth its cost. Try it and see what I mean.

Reply2 replies
Version 6.5.3
John Walker

I forgot to mention the scripting support. Scripts are great for automated configuration, right? This is rarely needed, but sometimes you'll need them. Glad to see InstallBuilder has it.


Only one true word in this review: "absurd". That also applies to the review itself.

Paul Whitcomb Member IconReview+4
Paul Whitcomb

In my opinion, this is a pretty good application. I installed it and tried it out. The installation did take about a minute to install, but that wasn't a problem.

There are many features that I thought were incredible useful like an HTML License file. It's typical for most installers to have a readme and license. I looked at "Customization" and saw that it had support for many operating systems that I've never even heard of. There's octal file permissions for windows which is useful at times when you want to make something read-only or not. Another feature that I liked a lot was the Splash Image feature. I don't know why you'd need this but it's good to have one.

The most useful feature was the Uninstaller so you could include an uninstaller in an installation.

If I had the money for such an advanced application, I would buy it. You shouldn't deny this application because of its price.

Reply0 replies
Version 6.5.0
Idk Member IconReview+26

This application costs too much. There are free tools to make installers for Mac OS X like Apple's Package Maker. There are also free tools to make Linux installers. There are also free tools to make Windows installers. Who would pay almost $800 when they can get something else that does the same thing for free?

Besides, installers are annoying and are usually not needed unless you're installing system files.

Reply2 replies
Version 6.5.0


"There are free tools to make installers for Mac OS X like Apple's Package Maker. There are also free tools to make Linux installers. There are also free tools to make Windows installers. Who would pay almost $800 when they can get something else that does the same thing for free?"

For example, somebody who does not want to learn how to create 3 separate installers with 3 different tools, who wants to create all installation packages from a single build machine and who wants support (we strive to provide excellent support to our customers). When you are running a business (and InstallBuilder is targeted at commercial software developers, though we have free licenses for open source projects) one important aspect to consider is how much time a particular tool is going to save you vs. how much it costs. In general, if you need to target more than one platform, InstallBuilder should pay for itself in the time savings alone.

"Besides, installers are annoying and are usually not needed unless you're installing system files. "

If you are installing a simple desktop app, no installer is necessary, just package the .app in a DMG and prompt the user to drag and drop in the Applications folder. However, InstallBuilder is targeted more towards users that require complex installation procedures, in which they need to check pre-requisites, ask the users questions during installation and validate the answers, and so on.

At the end of the day, the best choice depends on how many platforms you need to target, whether you are already familiar with other installation tools, how complex is your installation requirements and so on. For example of what our installers look like, check out http://bitnami.org For a sample of our customers, check out http://installbuilder.bitrock.com/customers.html

Daniel Lopez (InstallBuilder Developer)


Agree completely. I write multiplatform software about 5 years and have simple scripts for each platform with build installers form me. It's a really simple scripts. Of course i spent some time to solve all problems when was writing scripts first time, but it's better to spent once 1 week and have full control on installer build then pay ... oh, boy... pay $800 just for mac version?! After i looked at prices more carefully i have no more to say.... Just interesting - how many sells do you have, Daniel?

Teslanaut Member IconComment+149

I wonder if this thing has made money. If so, how much. I wonder.

Reply0 replies
Version 6.4.0
Gobra Member IconComment+161

Well, there are some applications than need an installation, but the fact is that Mac uses DON'T LIKE installers. Every installer-based software is a pain, it breaks common style of life with simple drag and drop to 'Applications' folder... Every vendor focused on Mac platform should avoid installer when it is possible to make his customer happy ;)

Reply0 replies
Version 6.4.0
Pripyat Member IconComment+264

PackageMaker is free with Xcode, simple, can be extended/customized via easy to code plugins if necessary and it's free for any kind of use. However the time of installers is over in the Mac world since a long time, they've been replaced with *zip (ideally) or *dmgs, which are also free.

Reply0 replies
Version 6.3.1
Tomis Member IconComment+118

Dear developers, please just put your entire application in a proper .app package ZIP'd up. If you need to instal support files, do that on first-run.

If, for some crazy reason, you absolutely can not get around the need for an installer, then grab Apple's Xcode, instal it, and go to /Developer/Applications/Utilities/PackageMaker.app

You can add scripts to your instal and all that niftiness, and do it using the native installer package format that users expect and trust.

Reply0 replies
Version 6.0.2
G. Member IconComment+10

These installer builders are just not needed on the Mac plattform. Either go with the system installer or, for normal application, use Drag&Drop install.

So, this application is just plain useless.

Reply3 replies
Version 4.5.3

That's not correct. It depends on the type of the application. We have a lot of customers who use InstallBuilder to walk users through complex installation scenarios, with the advantage that the code to do so is shared for the most part between their Linux, Windows and Mac installer. As an example of a Mac installer you can check out the SugarCRM one:


It installs MySQL, Apache and PHP and configures it on the fly. To do this, it needs to check for potential port conflicts, ask the user for the appropriate passwords, etc.




The Apple Developer Tools contains a free app too : "PackageMaker"...


Last time I checked, PackageMaker did not make installers for other platforms.

There are no Ratings for this App yet.
> 1 4


Current Version (9.x)


Downloads 12,892
Version Downloads 268
Type Utilities / System
License Demo
Date 27 Jun 2014
Platform OS X / PPC 32 / Intel 32
Price $995.00
Learn how MacUpdate Desktop makes installing apps from MacUpdate.com one-click easy.
Next time, install InstallBuilder with 1-click

Learn how MacUpdate Desktop can install apps on MacUpdate with the simple click of the Install apps with MacUpdate Desktop icon. Plus, keep all your apps updated. Play video...