I wrote some small apps using .NET 3.5 but now I am stuck with deployment problems. My customer will likely to be pissed off when he learns that he will have to download a 231megs dependency (.NET framework 3.5) which installs for 30 minutes (!!!) on an average machine. All, just to run my tiny apps.
Offline distribution is also problematic, since the customer wants the program to fit on a Mini CD (185 mega bytes maximum)
What can I do? I really like .NET, but now I feel hopeless. With almost any other choice (c,c++,python) I would have saved this headache.
update: this is small data processing software and mostly deployed in offline situations on nettops. I can't host is from the net.
You can use the .NET Client Profile installer instead of the full framework. Should be around 28MB and be a pretty quick install.
http://blogs.windowsclient.net/trickster92/archive/2008/05/21/introducing-the-net-framework-client-profile.aspx
Perhaps you should target the .NET 2.0 framework until your clients are ready to upgrade. Even if you weren't using .NET you will still have these headaches. If you were using Python you would still have to ensure that the user had the proper version of Python installed.
You should try it with the compact .net framework it's only 34mb big, and should be able to be installed quite quickly.
Please remember if you use the .NET setup bootstrapper application, it will only download the parts of the .NET framework that it needs. Usually less than 100mb, in a worst case scenario where they don't even have .NET 2.0 installed.
Also, depending on your application you may be able to use the .NET 3.5 Client Only framework, it is considerably smaller, however I do not know if there is a offline download for it.
You can set your application to use the Client Only framework from the project properties, just check the "Client Only framework subset" checkbox.
This won't work if your application uses WPF or WCF, I think. I'll update this later if I find out I am wrong.
EDIT:
One more option is to use something like Xenocode Postbuild or Xenocode Virtual Application (http://www.xenocode.com) studio to embed the .NET framework into your application so that the client would not need to have .NET installed on each machine.
However, this will make your application exe much larger. A project I work on uses Xenocode Postbuild to embed the .NET framework 3.0 and the exe size ends up being around 50mb, however, the app runs great off of a flash drive.
Related
I have created a C# 2010 application and now when I install it on user application it asks for complete dot net framework. Is it possible if I can only put required dll files with my application instead of installing complete dot net framework on user machine ?
No it is not possible
The .NET framework is more than just assembly to copy on the target computer. It is a more complex infrastructure that interact with the OS when an executable is loaded and, if it contains IL instruction, it compile it just in time in order to have it running. So non chanches in order to me to have it working without a .NET framework setup, that can be done in a separate step, or by creating a Setup for your app with the proper framework version indicated as a prerequisite.
An overview of the framework can be found here, but many more others are available in the net, you should read it to understand why is not a just matter of functions you need or not.
You may choose to target .NET Framework Client Profile. That would decrease download size of .NET files. See this link for more details on subject: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc656912.aspx#targeting_the_net_framework_client_profile
No, this is not possible. In order to install and run an application targeting the .NET Framework, the user must have the appropriate version of the .NET Framework installed on his/her computer.
If you want to make things easier, you should distribute your application with a setup program that ensures the .NET Framework is automatically installed along with your app. There's no reason the user should have to download and install the .NET Framework themselves. You can even create a setup program right from Visual Studio, so there's no excuse not to use one. It also makes managing dependencies and versioning conflicts much easier.
If you're really worried about the size of your dependencies and are targeting .NET 4.0, you can require only the Client Profile, which is a subset of the .NET Framework optimized for client applications. You'll have to set your project's Properties to target the .NET 4.0 Client Profile, and ensure that you're not using any of the assemblies it omits.
I hardly recommend wasting too much time on this, though. At last count, the Client Profile was only about 15–16% smaller than the full version—not an amount that makes much difference on the fast Internet connections found in most parts of the world today. And even less of a problem if you distribute on real media.
If you're absolutely dead-set on delivering an application without any dependencies (as comments to other answers suggest), you've got a hard road ahead of you. For starters, you'll need to drop .NET and C# entirely, and switch instead to an unmanaged language like C or C++. That's a very different programming environment than C#. Even if you're the best C# programmer in the world, there's going to be a significant learning curve to pick up C++.
And that still doesn't solve all of your problems. C++ applications compiled using a modern version of Visual Studio will still require that the appropriate version of the C Runtime Library be installed on the user's machine. This is, of course, a much smaller package than the entire .NET Framework, but you can't count on it always being there, so you'll need to install it along with your application.
Moreover, unlike the .NET Framework (which has WinForms, WPF, Silverlight, etc.) there is no GUI library bundled with C++. And if you choose any GUI library other than the native platform API (for example, Qt, which is quite popular for reasons that I still find inexplicable), that gives you an additional dependency. You mention Google's applications a couple of times as a model. Google Chrome targets the Win32 API directly and has written a bunch of their own code to draw their custom GUI on top of that base framework. That's really the only way you're going to eliminate dependencies entirely. And delay your app to market for a significant period of time.
I have created a new application on C# 2010. After creating a Setup file I came to know that for installation purposes user must have a dot net framework. Is there any way I can get rid of installing dot net framework on a user computer. Each time I try to install my application on the user computer it redirects to install the dot net framework. Any suggestion?
Well that's a problem; because of the design of .NET applications.
Here's some references for you:
Visual C#
"C# (pronounced "C sharp") is a programming language that is designed for building a variety of applications that run on the .NET Framework." [first sentence]
Intro to C# and .NET
As the comments on the question attempt to imply, the .NET Framework is required in order to execute .NET applications.
You have two choices, really:
Require that users have the .NET Framework installed. This is the most common choice, for reasons that will become clear in a moment. It's not unheard-of to have such requirements. It's similar to requiring that a user have Windows installed in order to run your Windows application.
Distribute the .NET Framework with your application installer. This is possible, but less often used because the .NET Framework is large compared to the average application. However, if you must do this, then the option is at least available. Some quick Googling brought me to this helpful blog post.
This isn't possible. C# is built on the .NET framework, so any C# app requires that a version of .NET be available. At http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.NET_Framework#History, you can see what .NET framework versions are available in various versions of Windows. The short story is that XP doesn't include anything, Vista includes 3.0, and Windows 7 includes 3.5. If you build for one of these versions, then on those OSes, your users won't need to install anything extra. Using the Client Profile instead of the full .NET can also help reduce or eliminate installs your users will need to do.
Unfortunately No. Its not possible.
To explain it simple terms.
Suppose if you have written only 1 Line of code where you would have simply declared an int variable, who will tell OS that it should create a space in memory?
That framework does exactly that creates basic environment to run your app in a System.
OOPs says about Real-world modeling and Relationships, so let me give you one from it.
Think yourself to be the C# app and Mother Nature/Environment(Greenry) to be .Net Environment.(.Net is called an Environment)
Can you survive without mother nature? From first second that you are in this world, you breathe. Who provides you that oxygen. MOTHER NATURE
While creating installation bundle you can add dot net frame work exe file as prerequisites, then while installing your application it can check whether the system having .net framework or not. if it is not installed it your application can install the frame work.
When you are using managed languages to writing applications you agreed to use their vm, c# codes compiles to IL which needs dot net framework for executing.
.net framework by default exists on windows 7,8,8.1 and 10 and I don't think that this is a challenge.
but if you insist on it so there is a way by using Mono, just remove features that does not support in mono from your project.
first install mono and cygwin, then copy your exe and mono.dll file to a folder, be sure that your file name is not long because in some cases bundling faild,now you can start bundling using mkbundle command.
after bundling finished you have a exe file that can run without .net framework
hope this help you
I have the same issue and want the app to setup using the existing dot net framework version (4.6), because the app setup requires 4.7.2 version that the PC doesn't meet the requirements
I am very much worried that i have seen many applications which i download from internet and they run without installing .net framework or java run time on windows seven, the confusion is, if it is so then in which language all these applications are built? if it is VB6 then it is very old, why latest software are using it, and did Microsoft not build Windows seven in any .net framework, for example if they build it in 3.5 then why it requires to install 3.5 .Net framework to run application.
Also let me know which db these apps usually use.
They could be built using C or C++, or any number of other languages with no runtime libraries (or whose runtime libraries are built into the OS). They may also just use .NET and assume that clients have the .NET framework installed. Finally, they may actually check for the .NET framework and prompt the user to install it if it isn't there, but since you already have it installed you don't see the prompt.
As for which databases they use, it is common to see applications use SQL Server CE or Express, Berkeley DB (BDB), or any number of other small-footprint databases. There is no clear winner in that area, just like in programming languages.
Mostly, Windows 7 has the built-in .NET framework 3.5 So, it automatically runs the application developed in .NET, where as few earlier version of Windows OS, the user didn't have the needed framework in built. It needs to be installed separately.
How can I check what objects, tools, variables, anything... are used from .NET 2.0 in a C# application.
How can I get a C# application run without .NET 2.0 ?
UPDATE:
sorry, I didn't clarify enought. Here's my situation: I have developed a pretty simple application in C#: embeded browser which displayes static webpages with an option of searching inside of these html pages. I'm using simple textbox, buttons components for this.
The application will be distribuited for people wich have very old PCs, even with windows 95. I would like the app to be runable on it, or at least on win 98, without telling the people to install .NET 2.0, as the users don;t really have PC usage skills :) .
I'm using a dataGridView as well.
You can have a look at this : http://www.remotesoft.com/linker/
"The mini-deployment tool puts
together the minimum set of CLR
runtime files and dependent assemblies
that can be simply copied to a single
folder on a target machine, and your
application runs as if the whole
framework is installed. Since the
installation is isolated into a single
folder, there will be no conflicts
with future .NET installation. When
linking is used for the dependent
assemblies, it will further reduce the
file size."
You may need to clarify a bit more.. do you want the app to run without .Net at all? Or you want it to run in .Net 3.5 without .net 2.0 bits?
If its the latter, then simply don't reference assemblies that are compiled in .net 2.0 (check the properties on the reference you have added). If its the former, then its really not feasable. Yes its possible, but it means deploying parts of the framework with your app, but then, you'd be deploying all the bits, including the 2.0 bits.
Your're question really needs more information though, it doesn't make much sense currently. Sorry. =)
To make sure it runs without .NET 2.0, compile it with the .NET 1.1 compiler.
But this seems like not a good idea. I'd recommend revisiting your requirements.
Win98 wasn't shipped with .NET. Using .NET v1.1 won't get you much more platform penetration than .NET 2.0, if any.
IT looks like windows 98 supports the .net framework. See this answer for details:
OS Compatibility for various .NET Framework versions
You cannot run a .NET application (i.e., that uses the CLR) if you haven't installed the corresponding .NET Framework binaries (i.e., that contains the CLR) directly or indirectly.
Period.
I am writing an app to discover what features exist on a pc. The user would go to a web page, download the app and execute it (with all the appropriate warnings, this is not spyware). The app would use the standard MS api to determine such things as connection speed, installed memory, firewall health, etc. Writing the app is not a problem, I could use Scripting Host, C#, C++, etc. The question is, if I chose C# is there any guarantee that a certain flavor of windows would have .net installed? The target pc is XP SP2 or better and Vista.
Thanks for the help.
Vista does have .NET 3.0 installed. XP SP2 doesn't have any .NET framework installed by default.
You may want to read Scott Hanselman's blog post SmallestDotNet: On the Size of the .NET Framework, specifically the What's the "Client Profile?" section:
The Client Profile is an even smaller
install option for .NET 3.5 SP1 on XP.
It's small 277k bootstrapper. When
it's run on a Windows XP SP2 machines
with no .NET Framework installed, it
will download a 28 meg payload and
give you a client-specific subset of
.NET 3.5. If the Client Profile
bootstrapper is run on a machine with
any version of .NET on it, it'll act
the same as the 3.5 SP1 web installer
and detect what it needs to download,
then go get it. There's more details
in the Client Profile Deployment Guide.
Mehrdad has it right, SP2 has no .NET installation by default. It's worth noting, however, that you can provide a download for users who lack the runtimes, providing whatever version you are using bundled in. It's an option through the creation wizard of one of the setup packages.
Like the above have stated, .NET is not installed by default. However if you were using ASP .NET with C#, many things could be gotten just by viewing the website (computer name, domain, userid, etc).
Well if you are afraid of use .Net but the client does not have installed, you could try a product which takes all your .Net dependencies and creates an isolated installer that will run on every computer, with all the risks that this could raise to your users (no updates, no bug fixes and such).
Here is the link:
http://www.remotesoft.com/linker/index.html
Hope this helps.
I would suggest avoiding .NET if possible since most versions of Windows come without it and the installer will just add to the pain of using your program. Unless its a large application already... but from the sound of it you can get what you want with a few KB's of C++ executable (i.e. almost instant download).
Pre-Vista: there is a significant chance that .NET will not be installed. And event if it is it may be 1.0 or 1.1.
Vista includes .NET 3.0 in RTM, but it is an optional component in Server 2008.
I would also be considered about the size and start up time of .NET. Overall this sounds like something to be written with as few dependencies as possible.
EDIT: Corrected Vista included 3.0 not 3.5.