We have a small application that is based on the .NET 2 Framework (C#) and is compatible with WindowsXP to Windows 8 but only 32bit (because our build machine was always 32bit too).
We are now looking to make some changes and also create a 64 bit version now.
My question is now, should we also upgrade to a newer version of the .NET Framework to be ready for the future or can we just stay with our existing .NET Framework 2.
It should still be compatible to Windows XP and all newer Windows (32 and 64 bit).
You can always upgrade it to version 4 of framework and it will still be compatible with the previous versions of windows.
Apart from that, you should always build the .Net application with "Any CPU". It will generate the intermediate code and later the JIT compiler will compile it to either 32bit or 64bit architecture depending on what machine it is being executed.
You should bother about CPU architecture only if you are referencing any unmanaged dll in your .Net application.
yes, It will still remain compatible to windows XP and all newer version of windows too. With upgrade to framework 4, you must have windows XP sp 3 as framework will not install otherwise.
As far as I know, framework 4.5 can only be installed on windows 7 or higher so upgrading to framework 4.5 might not be the option for you.
Upgrading to .NET 3.5 or 4.0 shouldn't pose a problem, the drawback being that fewer people will have the framework installed, and the benefit being that you get a better CLR and can use some new language features.
If you aren't going to change the application source, you won't take advantage of any new language features, and you are only going to add a new dependency (the newer framework) for the end user. I can't see any point in going from 2.0 to 4.0 in that case.
If you are going to continue developing the application at all, then I highly recommend moving to 3.5 or 4.0 to get the new features in those frameworks, most importantly LINQ.
Do note that the 4.5 Framework isn't compatible with Windows XP so you can't upgrade to 4.5 if you want to keep backwards compatibility with XP. As long as you need to target XP you are stuck with 4.0 or less.
As for output platforms, I recommend compiling like this:
Assemblies with native dependencies: Explicitly compile x86 and x64.
Entry point assemblies (.exe's basically): Explicitly compile for x86 and x64.
All other assemblies: Compile as AnyCPU.
Using explicit platform for executables is a good principle because it is least surprising for the user, and allows users on 64bit systems to run the 32bit application if they want. See this blog post for a longer answer http://blogs.msdn.com/b/rmbyers/archive/2009/06/09/anycpu-exes-are-usually-more-trouble-then-they-re-worth.aspx
Related
I asked this before but if i downgrade to .NET 3.5 I am not able to do some things with the windows form application I get errors because some things that have been added in later versions are not in the version that I am using.
I am making the application for Windows 7.
Link to previous: Can you launch a app C# so it doesn't need the .NET
As C# is essentialy a human-readable version of .NET's intermediate language (IL) you cannot run an application created using C# without .NET runtime installed.
You don't need to downgrade anything - just change target version to 3.5. However, you'll have to stick to features of 3.5 and below in that case.
If you want to use 4.0+ - just make an installer for your app which installs .NET 4.0 runtime alongside.
P.S.
I personally really doubt that there is noticable count of boxes running Windows 7 without at least .NET 4.0.
Just include the required Framework for your application in the Installer. They should be able to run side-by-side.
I'm a bit confused about targeting .net 4.0 app to run on windows 8.x. In my understanding, windows 8.0 comes with 4.5 and windows 8.1 comes with 4.5.1. So my question, if I build a WinForms or WPF client app targeting c#/.net 4.0 (in Visual Studio Project settings) and of course only using .net 4.0 features (i.e, no features from .net 4.5.x), then will this app run fine on windows 8.x without having install .net 4.0 framework (that is, only relying on what comes installed with OS)? Basically, I'm trying to avoid forcing end user to install .net 4.0 framework on their machine before running the app.
Looking at DLLs properties of various Microsoft DLLs (e.g., System) they show same runtime version when targeting either .net 4.0 or .net 4.5.x --> v4.0.30319. So my understanding here is that 4.0 and 4.5.x are targeting same clr runtime version So, my .net 4.0 app should run fine???
From ref here (http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb822049%28v=vs.110%29.aspx), it says .net 4.0 can't even be installed on win8.x.
In my tests, targeting .net 4.0 and running on clean install of win8.1 seems to work fine (without having to install anything else) but looking for advice on gotchas.
Thanks.
Note that the .NET framework is intrinsically backwards compatible - .NET 4.5 will execute .NET 4.0 code just fine. This can be seen even within a solution in that a .NET 4.5/4.5.1 project can reference an older .NET project without incident. This includes .NET 4.0, as well as earlier versions.
In addition to the backwards compatibility, .NET 4.5 does run on the CLR 4.0 - 4.5 is simply a library and compiler expansion.
Possible gotchas
This emphasis on backwards compatibility is why we almost never see functions disappear from the .NET Framework, just get marked [Obsolete]. it's a good idea to check if any functions you use have become Obsolete, though this is rare and such functions usually continue to work as expected.
Windows 8 does NOT like Drive mapping, and will demand that you use UNC paths if you application touches any networks drives.
Windows 8 can be far more aggressive with requiring Admin privileges to run, up to and including needing to explicitly start VS as admin when trying to compile a program which outputs to C:\Program Files\...
Final note: ALWAYS test your application on the targeted platform before releasing to users.
Per this question:
.NET Framework 4.5 was released on 15 August 2012., a set of new or improved features were added into this version. The .NET Framework 4.5 is only supported on Windows Vista or later. The .NET Framework 4.5 uses Common Language Runtime 4.0, with some additional runtime features.
I would say then that by virtue of having .NET 4.5 installed you will also always have .NET 4.0 installed. I don't think this should be an issue then!
From the link you posted:
Each new version of the .NET Framework retains features from the previous versions and adds new features.
Also from that link:
The .NET Framework 4.5 is an in-place update that replaces the .NET Framework 4 on your computer, and similiarly, the .NET Framework 4.5.1 4.5.2, and 4.6 Preview are in-place updates to the .NET Framework 4.5, which means that they use the same runtime version, but the assembly versions are updated and include new types and members.
So, if a system has 4.5, it will be able to run apps targeted for 4.0 as well. The fact that some versions cannot be installed most likely only means that they are already included from the start.
I have just written a small C# app that I want to put on 4/5 PCs. The PCs have various OS's installed ranging from XP (with the latest SP supporting 4.5) to Win 8 SP1. Each PC also has various apps running, which is where my question is.
I just wanted to check to see if there is anything I need to be mindful of in relation to older applications running earlier versions of .Net (in theory at least).
Thank you.
As long as they have the same .NET version as your app is targeting and you don't make any unmanged calls it should be fine.
The later .NET versions contain features and APIs that older versions do not. For instance, .NET 2 does not support LINQ, whereas .NET 3.5 does.
It is also worth noting that according to http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/8z6watww%28v=vs.110%29.aspx, Windows XP SP3 does not support .NET 4.5
I'm a student and at the moment i'm doing an internship at a company. This internship is about analysing a project. For this project I have made a demo to show to the Marketing director. The demo I have made is a simple project created in Visual Studio 2010 in c# with Windows Forms and a connection to an Access database.
So now i have to show this demo to this director in a presentation but after this presentation the director wants the project on his computer so he can try and use it. The problem is now that the computers here in this company don't have .NET framework 4.0 and the computers are so protected over here that we can't install anything new. To install something you have to go through a procedure that takes weeks.
I have looked al over the internet but all i find is how to install the .NET framework.
Is there any possible way that I can create an standalone exe without the need to install .NET framework? Please help!
If you want to execute an application that is developed using Net Framework 4, you will need to have installed .Net Framework 4 on client computer.
Your application is compiled in CIL (Common Intermediate Language), so it needs to be interpreted by the framework engine.
It is the same if you want to execute a Java program. You will have to install the Java Machine.
The only way you don't need to install frameworks is programming native applications with C, C++.
C# now supports this with .NET Native.
Instead of compiling to intermediate language, it will compile to native code and run with statically linked .NET libraries. Therefore, there will be no .Net Runtime requirements for end-users.
https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/vstudio/dn642499.aspx
https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dn584397(v=vs.110).aspx
Only works for Windows 10
You can't build a C# executable without .NET Framework. Even if some resources indicate that you can, that only works in theory.
But you could use an older version of .NET Framework like .NET 4.0. If this doesn't work for you, you have to choose a language like C++ which doesn't require CLR at all.
Update 2018:
Do not target .NET 2.0 or 3.5. It's not compatible with the 4.x version. However, .NET 4.0 targeted binaries work with .NET Framework 4.0, 4.5, 4.6, 4.7 and so on. So to reach maximum compatibility, compile with .NET 4.0. You will have to accept that some features will not be available, however, your binary will run virtually anywhere.
(2018: By now, .NET 2.0 - 3.5 has much lower distribution than 4.x)
Delphi is your solution, deploy native bin executables
YES, THIS IS POSSIBLE!
At least 3 ways exist:
1.you can check all OSes that you planning to run your app and build with such version of .NET. As Windows have a built-in framework libs.
Vista -.NET v3.0 -- All service packs
Windows 7 - .NET v3.5 -- All versions and service packs
Windows 8 - .NET v4.0 [Best choice if you are not sure]
Windows 8.1 - .Net v4.5
Windows 10 - .Net v4.6
as they are already pre-installed by default -- no extra install will be needed.
2.For windows 10 you can compile it into native code (but not into CIL) with ".NET Native". This is means that there are no .Net Framework will be needed for apps.
3.There is Turbo Studio (earlier Spoon and earlier XenoCode) that can wrap everything that your app needs and runs it in as a standalone.
From their site:
Turbo Studio
Run .NET Without .NET. Easily embed runtime dependencies such as .NET, Java, and SQL directly into virtual applications. Launch reliably on any desktop, regardless of underlying component installs.
You can use Mono and statically link you program, so your program don't need .NET CLR runtime and act as standalone program.
Mono Project
In more modern versions of .NET such as 5 and 6 and even with releases of .NET Core it had become a supported scenario to produce what is referred to as a single-file executable as well as a self-contained application.
As I understand it, these technologies take place of and build upon some of the capabilities that had been in the Mono development stack for a while now. Typically I've seen this feature used for applications which would be deployed to servers such as web sites and microservices however it could be used for scenarios such as the one that the original poster illustrates.
Using the .NET SDK publishing (producing the executable) for a single-file executable can be done using a command as the one below which comes directly from the documentation.
dotnet publish -r win-x64 -p:PublishSingleFile=true --self-contained true
For more details see Single file deployment and executable in the Microsoft .NET documentation site.
To be honest, it really isnt a problem nowadays. the .NET framework is found on almost every single computer nowadays, and you can even make a installer with Advanced Installer that silently install the .NET framework on your computer when you are installing the programme.
(all size references are in packaged size terms, not deployed/installed sizes)
Basically, the previous .NET Framework 3.5 was a few hundred MB's in size (231.5 MB's), and the Client Profile didn't exist for 3.5, however, a Client Profile did exist for version 4.0 at only 41 MB is size, while the Full Install (not CP) for 4.0 was 48.1 MB's in size.
Now, they are saying (in link posted at end of question) that most apps tended to need classes and namespaces that were not covered in the Client Profile 4.0, so they decided to not do a Client Profile for 4.5 for that reason. The other reason they quoted was that since they were able to get the Full Install version of the .NET Framework 4.5 down to 50 MB's, that also reduced the need of creating a Client Profile version (since .NET 4.5 Full Install is only 9 MB's greater than the .NET 4.0 Client Profile), and only 1. MB's greater than the equivalent Full Install (Standalone Offline Installer).
Now, my question really just has two parts, as follows:
1). How on earth (excuse my enthusiasm) how can the 3.5 and below (3.0, 2.0) versions be several hundred MB's in size, when the 4.0 & 4.5 versions have fixed so many issues in 3.5 and below, and have added so many features since 3.5 and below, while being several times smaller in packaged size?
2). Is this the final word on the Client Profile, or may we see one for .NET 4.5 someday?
3). How can 4.5 be only 1.9 MB's greater than 4.0 while fixing so man issues, and adding so many features?
Update: (and potential 4th question to anyone willing):
#Gromer raised an interesting point, that language packs aren't included. Since their needs to be 1 language included, I'm assuming it's English and that is the default? If this is so, how is an average internet user meant to download and install language packs for their own use and language when most people don't even know/understand what a ".NET Framework" is? Am I missing something or is this not important? How often does the framework communicate to the end user in spoken language or dialog boxes?
The article where I got some of this information is below:
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/dotnet/archive/2012/10/12/improvements-in-net-framework-setup-for-developers-it-pros-and-users.aspx
If you look inside a 3.5 "standalone" installer you will be stunned finding how many sub-setups are there.
Take for instance dotnetfx35_with_sp1.exe: it is a big 231MB chained installer.
When you decompress it with
dotnetfx35_with_sp1.exe /x:myfolder
you get a 240Mb folder, split on several other folders:
dotNetMSP [111.2Mb] ==> x64 [45.0Mb], ia64 [36.2Mb], x86 [29.7Mb], [other] 300k
dotNetFX20 [47.6Mb] ==> about 50/50% between 32 and 64 bit
dotNetFX30 [46.8Mb] ==> x64 [24Mb], x86 [22Mb]
dotNetFX35 [31.5Mb] ==> ia64 [12.8Mb], x64 [10.8Mb], x86 [7.7Mb]
...and some other files around...
As you know, .NET 3.5 requires .NET 3.0 and .NET 2.0, which is exactly what you see here..
Even without including language packs, they had to target a number of different platforms (from windows XP onwards) and to include a lot of patches.
Moving forward to .NET 4.x, those dependencies on previous frameworks have been dropped and, on the same time, they support fewer (and newer) operating systems and platforms (take for instance ia64 support - which was quite heavy on file size - and is now almost disappeared).
From what I see on newer setups, they also might have changed something on the internal format in which they ship the framework, probably one more efficiently compressed..
Last but not least, they changed many inner architectures, rewrote grounds-up a lot of things, which in turn probably let them remove other old things...
There is probably not a single extraordinary change that let them drop the size so much: probably all of the above and more :)
Just my 2c :)
I can't find a source for this, but I believe the reason why the .Net framework 3.5 installer was so big is because it contained pre-JITed versions of all assemblies (including in some cases ones which won't be used as they are targetted at the incorrect platform), wheras the .Net 4.0 installer doesn't - it JITs them at install time (this is why the installation of the .Net framework v4.0 takes so long)
I also recall being told that the .Net 4.5 installation will be much quicker as rather than JITing assemblies as part of installation it will JIT them in the background while the PC is idle (however there is a process to immediately JIT assemblies that an application attempts to load, however haven't been JITed yet)
I'm struggling to find any sources for this at the moment however I'll post them when I find them.
Scott Hanselman puts it eloquently:
Why is that one installer so big?
That giant .NET download is for one thing - It's meant for developers
or administrators who might want to redistribute a a setup that
contains not just the whole of the .NET Framework, but for all
possible platforms. It has installers for x86, x64 and ia64.
http://www.hanselman.com/blog/SmallestDotNetOnTheSizeOfTheNETFramework.aspx
And:
There's been some confusion about the size of the .NET Framework.
The .NET Framework is not really a 200+ meg download.
Which installer do I use? Here's the whole thing in a nutshell for
Developers, ISVs, and Administrators.
Offline Installer - One single file that can be run offline and can install the .NET Framework any system it's run on. It's complete, all
platforms, installable offline.
Online Installer - A 2.7 meg setup program that will detect what just the files you need, then go download between 10 and 60 megs.
This blog post goes into detail about how Microsoft made the .NET 4 framework platform installation smaller. Specifically:
We determined the subset of framework functionality that was used by
95+% of client applications and produced a first class package for
this scenario. The result of this is that, unless you are taking
advantage of features such as ASP.NET, you can now take a dependency
on a smaller framework.
My personal opinion is that with time evolving, Microsoft integrates more and more features of the core .NET Framework directly into the Windows Operating Systems by means of Service Packs and new Windows releases.
I believe, that they redesigned the Operating System bindings in V 4.0, so the code base and the additional resources required to get .NET up and running decreases for the supported operating systems. E.g. all the XP special editions were removed from the support list between 3.5 and 4.0. In 4.5 the OS base is shrinking even more (Vista/7/Win8 and Server 2008/2013).
Also like mentioned above features like languages except english were trimmed out and some other features were extracted to the .NET SDK package.
Just my two cents.