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).
Related
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.
My programming language is C# .Net 3.5 and I may have to install my applications in very old client systems (windows XP-SP1 and above) and may be that those systems do not contain any version of .Net (or even Windows-Installer-3.1) in them.
I have worked on VS-2008 deployment projects on and off since some time and I have some working knowledge of it.
I want to write a deployment project in VS-2008 but I have 2 questions :
Can a VS-2008 deployment project containing pre-requisites run on a system without any version of .Net (or even Windows-Installer-3.1) pre-installed in the system ?
How to create a boot-strapper installer to run in systems without .net pre-installed in them (boot strapper will install all pre-requisites including .net and other 3rd party run times) ?
Regards
Akshay Mishra
Can a VS-2008 deployment project containing pre-requisites run on a
system without any version of .Net (or even Windows-Installer-3.1)
pre-installed in the system ?
Yes, the EXE bootstrapper which handles prerequisites doesn't have any dependencies. So you can safely add Windows Installer and .NET Framework as prerequisites in your setup project.
How to create a boot-strapper installer to run in systems without .net
pre-installed in them (boot strapper will install all pre-requisites
including .net and other 3rd party run times) ?
Here is an article which may help: http://setupanddeployment.com/uncategorized/custom-prerequisite-visual-studio-setup-file/
You can use Salamander .net linker. I don't exactly understand what it does but what I know is that I was able to pack the necessary reference and the program into 1 folder. When I move the folder to a computer without .net framework installed, it was able to run.
The demo version of the program will give u nag screens every time u run the packed program.
The side effect of doing it this way is my program file size increased from few KB to 40MB.
Other references ..just for information:
http://www.codeproject.com/Articles/321269/Analyzing-a-Net-executable-or-DLL-without-NET-inst
http://www.codeproject.com/Questions/157853/Running-the-c-exe-without-net-framework-on-machine
You need to have .Net version installed on the client system.
Else it wont works.
Because even to start your application your application will search for CLR 2008 version.
You can do one thing. If you dont want to install .Net Framework, please develop your application in lower version of .Net framework.(May be .Net 2.0 will work without any requirement since it is XP SP1)
No, because there are not just DLLs, there is common language runtime needed to execute your program. Read the great book by Richter to better understand what happens when you create a program using .net libraries and its lifecycle.
By the way, i'm not quite sure, there must be some older version of .net installed with SP1. So may be you consider changing your application to use .NET 2?
UPDATE
May be you want to add .NET to your setup as prerequisite? You can add them without creating bootstrapper packages. See the article: http://www.codeproject.com/Articles/35976/Add-Prerequisites-of-NET-Framework-in-Visual-Studi
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.
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.
Hey guys - I just wrote an app using c# and ready to deploy it. Never deployed a c# app before.
I deployed it and VC# outputted a .application file, application folder, and an installer. One of my users ran the installer (Windows 7) and was prompted to download/install the .net framework - which took upwards of 10 minutes. This is not acceptable for how simple my app is.
Moreover, I will need this app to be able to run on mac osx and linux if possible. Should I have wrote this in Java instead (poor planning on my part). What are my options?
C# is compiled to bytecode that runs on the CLR, the virtual machine that's at the core of the .NET framework. So yes, you need the .NET framework to run that.
Most current versions of Windows (XP, Vista, 7, etc.) come with some version of the .NET framework pre-installed, so your users don't have to download and install it. However, you might have used a version that's not already installed on the computers of (some of) your users.
For Linux and Mac OS X there is Mono, which is an open source implementation of .NET, but it does not contain everything that Microsoft's .NET contains, so your program might not work fully on Mono.
Using Java is not a real solution in the sense that your users would need to download and install the JRE (Java Runtime Environment) to run Java programs, very similar to the .NET framework. An advantage if you'd have used Java, is that Java is much more cross-platform compatible than .NET (Microsoft has no real interest in making .NET run on anything else than Windows).
.NET apps require the .NET framework. Java apps require the JRE. Your app is simple because .NET has done a lot of the work for you. A lot of companies write desktop apps in C++, but you will have to be mindful of cross-platform issues.
Yes, with any language that compiles to run on a managed runtime (.NET or Mono CLR, Java JVM) you will need to have that runtime installed. A C# application can compile to run on Windows on the .NET CLR, or on all the platforms you mention to run on the Mono runtime instead. Alternatively, a Java application would compile to run on the Java JRE, which is also compatible with all the platforms you mention.
So with either language there is potentially this extra installation overhead, and with either language you can achieve what you want.
You'll need to have .NET installed on your client's system in order to use your application.
As for running cross-platform - depending on how your Application is written, this can be simple or difficult.
You may want to look at Silverlight. This is directly supported on OS X and works on Linux via Moonlight.
Another alternative is to use Mono to run your .NET application on other platforms.
A C# app will need an implementation of the CLR (.NET) running on the local machine in order to run. A Java app will need an implementation of the JVM so it is really no different. On Windows, I would expect most people to have a .NET install.
Take a look at the Mono project as far as running it on Linux and Mac:
http://mono-project.com/Main_Page
One thing you can consider is using an older version of the .NET framework to ensure that the greatest number of people have it installed. I would use .NET 3.5 or even 2.0 if you do not need fancy new features. That would have been installed already on Windows 7 for example.
Since the Windows 7 user had to download the framework I assume you are currently targeting .NET 4 which means you must be using Visual Studio 2010 (or an express version). Here is a link that tells you how to target a different version of the framework:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb398202.aspx
One quick note about Mono, it is an excellent cross-platform option but it does not support the Windows Presentation Foundation (WPF) GUI framework at this point. You will either have to use Windows Forms or create different front-ends for different platforms.
If you want to create a Linux GUI (also available on Windows and Mac) you can try GTK#:
http://www.mono-project.com/GtkSharp
For a Mac native GUI you can check out MonoMac:
http://mjhutchinson.com/journal/2010/06/09/monomac_in_monodevelop
An excellent IDE for cross-platform .NET development is MonoDevelop (it will read your VC# project files):
http://monodevelop.com/
Like Java, .Net languages need a runtime installed. The full .Net framework is sometimes too big for small applications, so there is a smaller version of it call the compact framework with a smaller footprint that will install and download faster. You can read about it at http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/netframework/aa497273.aspx. As noted by other answers most current versions of Windows come with various versions of .Net framework, so this installation may not be needed for every user.
As far as your cross platform needs go Mono allows for running .Net applications on Linux, I am not sure about running them on OSX. My assumption is you can not. Unfortunately your cross platform requirements made .Net a bad choice, and you should have gone with Java.
Other people gave you complicated answers. Well here's my simple answer. .NET framework is needed to run .NET applications and so do Java need JVM (as MCain said). Starting with Windows Vista, Microsoft includes .NET Framework built inside Windows. And in addition, .NET have versions, from 1.0 to 4.0. With Vista and Windows 7, .NET 3.5 is installed by default. I think your app is targeted for .NET 4.0 which is why a Windows 7 user needed to install .NET framework. For me, if I have to write a simple program, I'll use .NET 2.0 (later version = larger libraries, etc) so that my users (if they are Vista or Windows 7) don't have to install .NET again to run my software. You can choose which version of .NET you will target from New Project Window in Visual Studio.
You can change the target framework in the properties tab. If you start a project in VS2008 the default is .net 3.5 and for VS2010 it is .net 4.0. If you don't need the advanced features you can change your target back to 2.0 which should be available on most computers by now (I would guess far over 90%). Be sure to remove dependencies which are not available in 2.0 (like System.Linq, System.DataSet.Extensions) and the accociated imports (But the compiler will tell you what to do).