I have built a c#.net application in framework 4.0, i have no objection in installing .net for client's pc, but its so big to install on client end, is this not possible that there is some small setup or redist package, which we install and helps to run .net application easily, because installing a full fledge framework for just small apps looks very awkward. Please help.
Thanks in advance
Atif
If using .NET 4 specific features is less important than avoiding installation you can try to downgrade your app to .NET 2 or even .NET 1. Most modern versions of Windows come with older versions of .NET pre installed. The full list is here.
The .NET client profile is the small redist package. ("Small" by comparison to the full .NET framework install.) That's as small as .NET gets.
No, there is nothing smaller than the .NET Framework Client Profile 4.0. If this doesn't suit you, .NET is probably not the right platform for you.
The client profile is already a smaller version than the full framework.
There is also a very small web installer, but that doesn't change the fact that the user will need to do a larger download. There's no way around the client profile.
If you targeted .Net Framework 4.0 with your application, it must be installed on the client PC as well, there is no way around that...
If I had to make a serious recommendation, targeting the Client Profile would be the way to go.
For informational purposes however, there are a few commercial programs out there that supposedly perform native compilation, by converting all managed assemblies into actual native code. You can do a search for ".NET native compiler" or ".NET deployment without framework" if you are curious.
I have personally never used any of them before, and have to wonder about the performance of the application in the absence of a JIT compiler. There may be some people on SO that have had experience with some of these that could better address if they are effective, or just a waste of money.
You could try Silverlight (i.e., out-of-browser, trusted app). It's smaller than the client profile, and many machines already have it.
Related
So I've made the program on windows 10 Visual studio Version 10 in c# as a console application. The program is just monitoring file changes with fsw. I'm now faced with the challenge of doing literally everything in my power to not have to install anything on the PC of which this program will have to run (as in company they don't normally like us installing anything on the old pc's). So I believe I need to compile the program in a lower version of .Net if possible?
Any help regarding the matter would be appreciated as most things I find is people wanting to move from 1.1 to higher versions or the odd reference to web applications or c++.
Also, (though it may be obvious) I'm not a coder, not even my job really and thus I am quite inexperienced so any answers dumbed down a lot would be incredibly useful.
Thanks in advance!
First of all, check if .Net framework is installed if you have not already, and in that case what version it has.
According to .Net version and dependencies windows XP does not include any .Net version. That page also include links on how to check version. The last .net release for windows XP is .Net 4.0. See .Net system requirements.
So there is no indication that you should use .Net 1.1. Either you would use whatever version is installed, or you install some version you want (i.e. the highest supported), or you do not install any version, and do something else.
Modern versions of Visual studio allow targeting of .Net framework from 2.0 and onwards. And I'm fairly sure you can run .Net 2.0 and later version on windows 10 if you install the framework. Using .Net 1.1 would probably require you to use windows XP as the development system, so I would avoid this if at all possible.
I would recommend using a virtual machine for testing, since it allows you to test on windows XP on your machine, and makes it easy to revert any failures. I would probably recommend migrating the entire PC to a virtual machine it at all possible, since this would reduce magnitude of hardware failures, and make backup and restoring much easier.
I have a simple application made using C#.
Now how do I make it , such that it runs on all systems.
If a PC does not have .NET framework installed - it shouldsiliently install it with only the bare minimum requirements that the program needs.
Installing .NET framework - too big in size compared to many program , which is just a few kilobytes. Also is shoulf be silent and only if required.
Basically the application should be light and capable to run in all Windows systems.
Not interested in getting to Linux users.
Should I use Mono Project.
Else is there a way to get the bare minim .NET framework selectively pre-installed.
Please advise.
Thanks
Have a look at mkbundle. It will create a standalone executable, with no other dependencies. In particular it does not need neither the Mono runtime nor .NET to be installed in order to execute.
The size might still be a problem (it will likely be several megabytes, even compressed), so there is another tool to strip out everything you don't need from the assemblies: the monolinker.
Note that the size will likely not reach the kilobyte range even after doing all this.
You can do this with a lot of work and the help of the Mono framework. See Embedding Mono for more information.
All that considered, it would be much easier to use a boostrapper to get a version of the .NET Client Framework installed. But you're going to lose the ability to install silently or be in the "kilobytes" footprint.
Unfortunately you cant run a .NET program on a machine that does not have the .NET framework installed and the installer of the program could be made to download the framework automatically but not in .NET .
To run .net applications you need the .net framework installed, that should be either the full version or the limited client profile edition.
The easiest way is to create a setup project from VS and require the .net version you want... the installer should be able to install the .net framework from the internet so you are not required to ship it with the app, which you can do by the way from the installer.
Mono won't be different since it still needs to be installed on the system. Mono however has full AOT support, but I don't have any idea whether that would help you or not... it is still a huge overkill anyway.
If you need your app to be small and run on ANY windows without any dependencies, you should do in c/c++ or vb6 whose runtime ships with most windows versions.
I intend to learn C# and start coding Windows .exe applications, but the only thing that is holding me back is that not all potential users have the .NET framework installed and therefore would be unable to run my application.
Is there any way around it?
Thanks!
No. c# only target .NET (or a comparable framework, such as mono). As an aside, Win7 comes with .NET preinstalled, and I believe Vista did as well. There are also a ton of MS apps which require .NET. It's getting near ubiquitous on windows machines, so I wouldn't worry about it.
YES, there was XenoCode that can wrap everything that your app needs and runs it in as a standalone. I don't know what kind of dirty tricks they use, but there IS a way.
Now it's Spoon
From their site:
Spoon Studio
Easily virtualize all of your applications for instant,
zero-install delivery on Spoon Server and Spoon.net.
Spoon Studio lets you convert your existing software applications into virtual applications
that run with no installs, conflicts, or dependencies.
BTW, I'm in no way affiliated with them - just curious if the community will accept it or flame it.
Yes, 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
Does not work before Windows 10
C# is just a programming language. From a strictly technical point of view, someone could develop a C# compiler that targets the Windows API or <insert your target platform here> directly. Sure, it would be a lot of effort because C# was designed to fit .NET, which means the compiler writer would essentially have to re-implement .NET to provide all C# features.
From a practical point of view, you just want to use C# to target either .NET or Mono.
Microsoft started shipping .NET 2.0 with XP since 2005. So, even if your target machine was bought somewhere within the last 8 years, it should still have .NET.
If you are targetting the linux machines on the other hand, there is the mono framework available for that. You don't even have to include it, most repositories like ubuntu, debian, etc. has packages available for mono in their repositories. All you have to do is make your own package dependent on Mono runtime.
NO as simple as that
Everybody might say that it is already installed/ or you need the runtime. But that means YOU NEED IT
It's not about C#. It's about whether you want to develop managed or unmanaged applications. C# is the choice for developing managed applications which run on .NET Framework.
If you want to avoid it, you can go to Visual C++ (without .NET) development using Visual Studio
However, .NET framework comes pre-installed with latest Os like Win 7 these days.
Microsoft makes a redistributable installer that installs the version of .NET that you require. It bloats your install, but it's pretty much the only way to do what you need.
You'll need the .NET Runtime. However, most of the PCs running windows already have it.
I have to give my customer my application. It's a simple application(3Mo).
I think it's really unnecessary to oblige my client to install the whole .NET framework (the 3.5) to work with a simple application (3 mo). I mean I'm sure that there is a way to avoid that, just include some dlls or something like that.
Well I have the dll in my project reference(LINQ dll, core Dll, system Dll, winfom Dll, office Dll and some other)
is it possible to give the application with those dll and that way I avoid installing the whole .NET framework?
Well I don't even need to make an MSI or setup project,
just give him the exe generated with Visual Studio and that's it.
I'm using VS 2010, C#, 3.5.NET
It's worth noting that Windows comes with various flavours of .Net installed depending on the version of Windows. If I remember correctly...
Win7 comes with .NET 3.5 SP1
Vista comes with .NET 3.5
XP SP2 includes .NET 2
Depending on your target audience you might find that this is good enough!
If these conditions are true:
a) you really want to avoid .NET framework dependency
b) it's a really easy/small application
Consider the option of porting it to c++
If not
use default framework (.NET 2, or 3.5 or 3.5SP1) that comes by default in windows as Dan Puzey said.
No it is not possible. Client has to install .NET Framework 3.5 (with SP1) redistributable package.
Edit: If you didn't want client dependency on .NET Framework you should choose another application type: Web application where .NET dependency is only on the server.
Most people have some flavor of .NET installed although most don't yet have 3.5. But you can create an installer that will download an install transparently to the user. Also if you target the Client Profile this dependency will be smaller.
Your client should have .net, there's no reason not to and if they haven't, they are a fool. Running XP with less than Service Pack 2 is dangerous. For the non-technically-inclined, compare it to using a van that's been subject to a manufacturer's recall. It may not necessarily be faulty, but the manufacturer has told you that it's no longer fit for use and are willing to make good at their own expense. As a responsible business owner, you wouldn't shirk that responsibility. In a similar vein, maintaining your Windows installation to the manufacturer's recommendation is not optional.
Have you considered making it a web app, with asp.net? The effort of porting should be less than a complete rewrite (depends on the applications functionality).
I'm developing an winform application for Windows Mobile 5.0 and above. I'm using .Net Compact Framework 2.0 SP2.
I choose that version of compact framework because is installed on Windows Mobile 6.0 rom (in fact, the installed version is .Net Compact Framework 2.0 SP1). Because of that, program will run faster and is going to be easier for the user to install my program.
But I think I can use .NET Compact Framework 3.5 on windows mobile 5.0 and above.
What do you recommend to me?
Microsoft maintains a document titled Devices and Platforms Supported by the .NET Compact Framework which outlines which OS releases the various versions of the .NET CF support and which version you can expect to find in each OS in ROM.
In general there is no right answer to your question.
As you can see from the table, excluding one or two edge cases (Smartphone 2003 etc) each release of the .NET Compact Framework will pretty much run on any Windows Mobile device you can throw at it.
This means the decision really comes down to the development productivity of using a later .NET CF version (LINQ, WCF etc), vs the potential difficulty of distributing and installing the required .NET CF runtime.
The decision of the feasability of installing the .NET CF runtime as part of your application installation process will depend upon your situation. For example in one cost sensitive corporate project I worked on we decided to use the version in ROM since deployments were done over the air and 10,000 devices x a couple of megabytes is a lot of additional bandwidth during app updates etc. Your situation probably has a different set of driving factors.
My first question is, are you targeting general public users or is this an application for a company / employees.
Based on your desire for an easy install, I'm guessing this is for the general public to install on their cell phone?
In that case, it makes sense to go with a version of the CF that is already available on the device.
But, the trade-off is loss of features available in the higher versions of the framework. I think you have to determine if you would really need those features in your application.
If you expand a little on the application and the target users, might get better advice.