How do MS expect to get .NET runtimes on peoples PC's?
-
Back when MSI first came out, people were bitching about the 1MB download. Now that isn't a big deal. Our EXE download has both the NT4 and 9x MSI files for over 3MB of extra downloads. Nobody has said anything. But, I will admit that 21MB is HUGE. But in 2 years, all the new OSes will be including it already installed. Also, applications distributed via CD won't even think twice about adding 21MB. Tim Smith Descartes Systems Sciences, Inc.
Oh... If you ask me is 21MB to big for my downloads... Hell YES. No way would I distribute a NET program over the net at this time. However, in the long run, I don't see it being a problem. After all, my application requires IE4+ be installed for HTML help. 4 years ago, it would have been a problem. But these days it isn't a concern. That is unless the government decides it is in the people best interest to remove IE from Windows. (HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH) Tim Smith Descartes Systems Sciences, Inc.
-
Okay so how are they going to do it. Say you have an app that you want to distribute on the web. You download it say 1 meg, and then find you have to download the .NET runtimes. It would be fine to include these ona CD - loads of space, but it would be nice to think people would not have to do that. How about sneaking it in the next service pack? e.g. Win2K SP3? for NT4 SP7? Or how about Windows Update? Giles
Giles, Having the runtime installed everywhere is so important for Microsoft that they'll likely do everything in their power to make it happen: AOL-style coasterware, competitions and rewards, the next versions of *every* product they have (Windows, Office, Games, etc.) will include the runtime, and they will likely cut deals with any company that has software widely distributed on CD (Intuit, Corel, etc.,). Further, any company that includes VBA/VSA will likely be including the runtime in their next versions (Corel, Autodesk, etc.) The question of whether they make it a requirement for service packs or security patches is an interesting one. You can bet on any relatively big patches or upgrades will have it (IE v.next, W2K sp3, XP sp1 etc.), the security pathes, IM and other smaller updates probably won't. I think the focus will be on large corporations and server hosted applications and not really the desktops of joe-average home or SOHO users. If that's the case, it will be far easier to reach saturation in those spaces and allow the SOHO/Home users to get it with their next PC upgrade, or with a specific application that requires .Net. David http://www.dundas.com
-
Giles, Having the runtime installed everywhere is so important for Microsoft that they'll likely do everything in their power to make it happen: AOL-style coasterware, competitions and rewards, the next versions of *every* product they have (Windows, Office, Games, etc.) will include the runtime, and they will likely cut deals with any company that has software widely distributed on CD (Intuit, Corel, etc.,). Further, any company that includes VBA/VSA will likely be including the runtime in their next versions (Corel, Autodesk, etc.) The question of whether they make it a requirement for service packs or security patches is an interesting one. You can bet on any relatively big patches or upgrades will have it (IE v.next, W2K sp3, XP sp1 etc.), the security pathes, IM and other smaller updates probably won't. I think the focus will be on large corporations and server hosted applications and not really the desktops of joe-average home or SOHO users. If that's the case, it will be far easier to reach saturation in those spaces and allow the SOHO/Home users to get it with their next PC upgrade, or with a specific application that requires .Net. David http://www.dundas.com
Do you suppose that IE7 might need the runtime?
-
Kannan Kalyanaraman wrote: From a different perspective, I believe that this can even be achieved by "one cool product" which is developed based on dot net, something like "winzip" Huh? unless MS bribes WinZip maker heavily, why would they rewrite it on .NET? This will only put millions of WinZip users in a very awkward position by forcing them to download some 21 MB redistributable (instead of current < 1.4 MB). // Fazlul
Get RadVC today! Play RAD in VC++ http://www.capitolsoft.com
Does anyone even use WinZip anymore? We have the compressed folders file type on XP, 2K, and Me. That seems to work a lot better, with shell integration and everything. Now that I have XP, is there ANY reason for the use of WinZip? There must be, otherwise, WinZip would be out of customers. But I can't find it! -Domenic Denicola- Geek^n http://madhamster.50megs.com "Any technology that is indistinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced..."
-
Does anyone even use WinZip anymore? We have the compressed folders file type on XP, 2K, and Me. That seems to work a lot better, with shell integration and everything. Now that I have XP, is there ANY reason for the use of WinZip? There must be, otherwise, WinZip would be out of customers. But I can't find it! -Domenic Denicola- Geek^n http://madhamster.50megs.com "Any technology that is indistinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced..."
Transmitting files from one machine to another. Some e-mail clients, for example, wont accept any other attachment formats. ________________ David Wulff http://www.davidwulff.co.uk Sonork ID: 100.9977 Dave Contents of my clipboard: Barclays Visa Connect - 4936-3503-2 -- sh*t, I'd better edit the rest out...
-
Okay so how are they going to do it. Say you have an app that you want to distribute on the web. You download it say 1 meg, and then find you have to download the .NET runtimes. It would be fine to include these ona CD - loads of space, but it would be nice to think people would not have to do that. How about sneaking it in the next service pack? e.g. Win2K SP3? for NT4 SP7? Or how about Windows Update? Giles
I think .NET's first objective it to compete with Java on the server side. There's no need to distribute .NET to millions of people if it's only used server side. As for client side it's just like VB. You have to download and install a 6mb VB runtime DLL to run a VB app. Since that's the case you will find a lot of people will NOT use VB and will NOT use C# for small/efficient client side apps. That will still be the domain of C++ apps. I don't expect to use .NET for small client side apps for a long time to come.
Todd Smith
-
Do you suppose that IE7 might need the runtime?
They would cut away a lot of clients with slower machines. I doubt. -- See me: www.magerquark.de
-
They would cut away a lot of clients with slower machines. I doubt. -- See me: www.magerquark.de
Uwe Keim wrote: They would cut away a lot of clients with slower machines. OK, like you I doubt as well. I actually think it would have been better that for .NET s future it was limited to 2000 and XP users. It would have simplified some areas of development a lot. Regardz Colin J Davies
Sonork ID 100.9197:Colin
If you can't dazzle them with your brilliance, baffle 'em with your bullsh*t P J Arends 0 = ( ( x^2 - (x-1)^2 ) + (x-1)^2) * ( (x-1)^2 + ( x^2 - (x-1)^2 ) ) - x^4 x != 0 0 = sqrt( x^2 - (x-1)^2 ) - 5
-
Does anyone even use WinZip anymore? We have the compressed folders file type on XP, 2K, and Me. That seems to work a lot better, with shell integration and everything. Now that I have XP, is there ANY reason for the use of WinZip? There must be, otherwise, WinZip would be out of customers. But I can't find it! -Domenic Denicola- Geek^n http://madhamster.50megs.com "Any technology that is indistinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced..."
Domenic wrote: Does anyone even use WinZip anymore? We have the compressed folders file type on XP, 2K, and Me. I actually hate the XP shell integration for zip files. Everytime I go to ftp a zip file to my webserver it opens it up as a directory with no files inside, then creates an empty directory on the server. Now I have to rename all .zip's to .z before uploading :(( James Sonork ID: 100.11138 - Hasaki "My words but a whisper -- your deafness a SHOUT. I may make you feel but I can't make you think." - Thick as a Brick, Jethro Tull 1972
-
Do you suppose that IE7 might need the runtime?
There may be some small dependencies between IE and runtime, but I doubt at least in the short term those dependencies will be for any key part of IE. You have to remember that IE has a large investment in legacy code, and so the move to .Net will likely be in stages, over successive versions. I'd expect (although we really haven't heard much about this to date), that .Net based controls will replace the concept of ActiveX and JavaBeans in web pages as client side controls. Certainly to use that functionality, you'll need to have .Net installed on the client, and so it makes sense to have it as a default installation piece in IE from now on. David http://www.dundas.com
-
Uwe Keim wrote: They would cut away a lot of clients with slower machines. OK, like you I doubt as well. I actually think it would have been better that for .NET s future it was limited to 2000 and XP users. It would have simplified some areas of development a lot. Regardz Colin J Davies
Sonork ID 100.9197:Colin
If you can't dazzle them with your brilliance, baffle 'em with your bullsh*t P J Arends 0 = ( ( x^2 - (x-1)^2 ) + (x-1)^2) * ( (x-1)^2 + ( x^2 - (x-1)^2 ) ) - x^4 x != 0 0 = sqrt( x^2 - (x-1)^2 ) - 5
Colin Davies wrote: it would have been better that for .NET s future it was limited to 2000 and XP users. According to M$ support policy, that's all that exist now. According to policy, all OSs older than the most current two are obsolete, and obviously no one still uses them. New idea for Hallmark Cards: "Congratulations on your new bundle of joy! Did you ever find out who the father is?"
-
Domenic wrote: Does anyone even use WinZip anymore? We have the compressed folders file type on XP, 2K, and Me. I actually hate the XP shell integration for zip files. Everytime I go to ftp a zip file to my webserver it opens it up as a directory with no files inside, then creates an empty directory on the server. Now I have to rename all .zip's to .z before uploading :(( James Sonork ID: 100.11138 - Hasaki "My words but a whisper -- your deafness a SHOUT. I may make you feel but I can't make you think." - Thick as a Brick, Jethro Tull 1972
I think you can uninstall it from add/remove programs if you want. -- Andrew.
-
Colin Davies wrote: it would have been better that for .NET s future it was limited to 2000 and XP users. According to M$ support policy, that's all that exist now. According to policy, all OSs older than the most current two are obsolete, and obviously no one still uses them. New idea for Hallmark Cards: "Congratulations on your new bundle of joy! Did you ever find out who the father is?"
Roger Wright wrote: According to M$ support policy, that's all that exist now. According to policy, all OSs older than the most current two are obsolete, and obviously no one still uses them WOW, maybe finally someone at MS has been listening to my emails :-) I doubt it though somehow. Regardz Colin J Davies
Sonork ID 100.9197:Colin
If you can't dazzle them with your brilliance, baffle 'em with your bullsh*t P J Arends 0 = ( ( x^2 - (x-1)^2 ) + (x-1)^2) * ( (x-1)^2 + ( x^2 - (x-1)^2 ) ) - x^4 x != 0 0 = sqrt( x^2 - (x-1)^2 ) - 5
-
Okay so how are they going to do it. Say you have an app that you want to distribute on the web. You download it say 1 meg, and then find you have to download the .NET runtimes. It would be fine to include these ona CD - loads of space, but it would be nice to think people would not have to do that. How about sneaking it in the next service pack? e.g. Win2K SP3? for NT4 SP7? Or how about Windows Update? Giles
A service pack is too iffy. Not enough people install them (exactly none of my consulting customers ever have). A better way would be to package it as a Trojan Horse payload that uses a security hole in IE that only Micr$oft knows about yet, and just let 'er rip. One mass email containing the code under the cover of a new special offer sent to just the registered Windows users should be enough to create a critical mass, and voila, within a week the whole world will have the upgrade! It wouldn't have to download the whole thing each time, just an increment of a couple hundred kB each time an infected user connects to the Internet. Once the Trojan had assembled all the pieces it would wait for an idle period, say when the user gets up for another beer, then quietly install the runtimes and reboot. The user would write the reboot event off as just another dang Windows quirk and carry on, blissfully unaware of the upgrade. "Cover me, hon... I'm gonna pass the Toyota!" - overheard on an L.A. freeway...
-
Roger Wright wrote: According to M$ support policy, that's all that exist now. According to policy, all OSs older than the most current two are obsolete, and obviously no one still uses them WOW, maybe finally someone at MS has been listening to my emails :-) I doubt it though somehow. Regardz Colin J Davies
Sonork ID 100.9197:Colin
If you can't dazzle them with your brilliance, baffle 'em with your bullsh*t P J Arends 0 = ( ( x^2 - (x-1)^2 ) + (x-1)^2) * ( (x-1)^2 + ( x^2 - (x-1)^2 ) ) - x^4 x != 0 0 = sqrt( x^2 - (x-1)^2 ) - 5
I think this is the current list of supported desktop operating systems... Windows 98 Windows ME Windows NT 4.0 Server (not sure about workstation) Windows 2000 Windows XP I think they stopped selling Windows 95 last year or the year before. Tim Smith I know what you're thinking punk, you're thinking did he spell check this document? Well, to tell you the truth I kinda forgot myself in all this excitement. But being this here's CodeProject, the most powerful forums in the world and would blow your head clean off, you've got to ask yourself one question, Do I feel lucky? Well do ya punk?
-
A service pack is too iffy. Not enough people install them (exactly none of my consulting customers ever have). A better way would be to package it as a Trojan Horse payload that uses a security hole in IE that only Micr$oft knows about yet, and just let 'er rip. One mass email containing the code under the cover of a new special offer sent to just the registered Windows users should be enough to create a critical mass, and voila, within a week the whole world will have the upgrade! It wouldn't have to download the whole thing each time, just an increment of a couple hundred kB each time an infected user connects to the Internet. Once the Trojan had assembled all the pieces it would wait for an idle period, say when the user gets up for another beer, then quietly install the runtimes and reboot. The user would write the reboot event off as just another dang Windows quirk and carry on, blissfully unaware of the upgrade. "Cover me, hon... I'm gonna pass the Toyota!" - overheard on an L.A. freeway...
LOL :-D I like your theory best of all. It's just crazy enough to work. :laugh: "Why kill time, when you can kill yourself?" - Cabaret Voltaire
-
A service pack is too iffy. Not enough people install them (exactly none of my consulting customers ever have). A better way would be to package it as a Trojan Horse payload that uses a security hole in IE that only Micr$oft knows about yet, and just let 'er rip. One mass email containing the code under the cover of a new special offer sent to just the registered Windows users should be enough to create a critical mass, and voila, within a week the whole world will have the upgrade! It wouldn't have to download the whole thing each time, just an increment of a couple hundred kB each time an infected user connects to the Internet. Once the Trojan had assembled all the pieces it would wait for an idle period, say when the user gets up for another beer, then quietly install the runtimes and reboot. The user would write the reboot event off as just another dang Windows quirk and carry on, blissfully unaware of the upgrade. "Cover me, hon... I'm gonna pass the Toyota!" - overheard on an L.A. freeway...
I believe Installing the run-time doesnt require a reboot!!! Cheers Kannan
-
I think you can uninstall it from add/remove programs if you want. -- Andrew.
-
I believe Installing the run-time doesnt require a reboot!!! Cheers Kannan
I remeber seeing an atricle by a guy who wrote a utility to crack the 'password protection' features in Word, Excel etc. This is not hard for the readonly password, as the passowrd is visibly stored in the file - open it up in notepad and have a search, but for the password to read, its a bit more tricky. None the less, this was a peice of shareware. The algorithm took about a milli second or two to get the password, even on a DX4 on Windows 95. So to make people think that their computer was doing something clever, he made it process (with progress bar) for about 10 seconds while it 'cracked' the password.:laugh: So whats wrong with a reboot - give the public what they would expect. Giles