Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Code Project
  1. Home
  2. The Lounge
  3. .NET Framework Install Base

.NET Framework Install Base

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved The Lounge
csharpcssdotnetcomsysadmin
8 Posts 6 Posters 0 Views 1 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • C Offline
    C Offline
    Charlie Williams
    wrote on last edited by
    #1

    One of the more common reasons sited (at least in my experience) for not programming agaist the .NET framework (other than for server-based applications) has been the requirement that the end user download and/or install the (somewhat less than lean) framework itself. The argument is that any gains in productivity are irrelevant in the face of users refusing to install the requisite runtime and class library. Today's blog post[^] from Brad Abrams seems to suggest that this particular argument might soon be obsolete. That's not the only argument against managed code, of course, but it's a start. Charlie if(!curlies){ return; }

    N M 2 Replies Last reply
    0
    • C Charlie Williams

      One of the more common reasons sited (at least in my experience) for not programming agaist the .NET framework (other than for server-based applications) has been the requirement that the end user download and/or install the (somewhat less than lean) framework itself. The argument is that any gains in productivity are irrelevant in the face of users refusing to install the requisite runtime and class library. Today's blog post[^] from Brad Abrams seems to suggest that this particular argument might soon be obsolete. That's not the only argument against managed code, of course, but it's a start. Charlie if(!curlies){ return; }

      N Offline
      N Offline
      Navin
      wrote on last edited by
      #2

      One key piece of information is missing - what *version* of the .NET framework? That might make a difference depending on what features your code uses. An expert is somebody who learns more and more about less and less, until he knows absolutely everything about nothing.

      J 1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • C Charlie Williams

        One of the more common reasons sited (at least in my experience) for not programming agaist the .NET framework (other than for server-based applications) has been the requirement that the end user download and/or install the (somewhat less than lean) framework itself. The argument is that any gains in productivity are irrelevant in the face of users refusing to install the requisite runtime and class library. Today's blog post[^] from Brad Abrams seems to suggest that this particular argument might soon be obsolete. That's not the only argument against managed code, of course, but it's a start. Charlie if(!curlies){ return; }

        M Offline
        M Offline
        Member 96
        wrote on last edited by
        #3

        That's very good to know. We are targeting .net in everything now and our first .net app is rapidly approaching the market. It should also be noted that any new ATI graphics card comes with the .net framework as their Catalyst management software is .net based.

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • N Navin

          One key piece of information is missing - what *version* of the .NET framework? That might make a difference depending on what features your code uses. An expert is somebody who learns more and more about less and less, until he knows absolutely everything about nothing.

          J Offline
          J Offline
          Judah Gabriel Himango
          wrote on last edited by
          #4

          I've read from several credible sources, including Brad Abrams and Wesner Moise, that the Everett version of the .NET framework (Everett being DNF v1.1) has over 70 million installs. And that was several months ago. It's not like the DNF *has* to be downloaded. The .NET boostrapper allows you to write a plain old Win32 installer, which will install your .NET app, then download and install the DNF only if necessary, thereby eliminating a huge chunk of the download should the DNF already be installed.

          Any remotely useful information on my blog will be removed immediately.

          There are 10 kinds of people in the world. Those who have heard of the ubiquitous, overused, worn-out-like-an-old-shoe binary "joke" and those who haven't. Judah Himango

          L 1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • J Judah Gabriel Himango

            I've read from several credible sources, including Brad Abrams and Wesner Moise, that the Everett version of the .NET framework (Everett being DNF v1.1) has over 70 million installs. And that was several months ago. It's not like the DNF *has* to be downloaded. The .NET boostrapper allows you to write a plain old Win32 installer, which will install your .NET app, then download and install the DNF only if necessary, thereby eliminating a huge chunk of the download should the DNF already be installed.

            Any remotely useful information on my blog will be removed immediately.

            There are 10 kinds of people in the world. Those who have heard of the ubiquitous, overused, worn-out-like-an-old-shoe binary "joke" and those who haven't. Judah Himango

            L Offline
            L Offline
            Lost User
            wrote on last edited by
            #5

            The big problem, imho, is that the DNF needs IE 6 (which does NOT come with Win98... yes, people are still using this!) The DNF also requires a recent version of MDAC. That's a bunch of stuff to install in order just to install the framework. Nethertheless, .NET is an amazing platform to work with. With a good installer you can walk your customers through the (hazardous?) install.

            R 1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • L Lost User

              The big problem, imho, is that the DNF needs IE 6 (which does NOT come with Win98... yes, people are still using this!) The DNF also requires a recent version of MDAC. That's a bunch of stuff to install in order just to install the framework. Nethertheless, .NET is an amazing platform to work with. With a good installer you can walk your customers through the (hazardous?) install.

              R Offline
              R Offline
              Russell Morris
              wrote on last edited by
              #6

              DNF v1.1 only requires IE 5.01, and the MDAC update is only required if you're working with the System.Data classes. -- Russell Morris "So, broccoli, mother says you're good for me... but I'm afraid I'm no good for you!" - Stewy

              L 1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • R Russell Morris

                DNF v1.1 only requires IE 5.01, and the MDAC update is only required if you're working with the System.Data classes. -- Russell Morris "So, broccoli, mother says you're good for me... but I'm afraid I'm no good for you!" - Stewy

                L Offline
                L Offline
                Lost User
                wrote on last edited by
                #7

                Yeah you're right, 5.01. But 5.0 is shipped with W98 so that doesn't solve the problem. I think you're wrong regarding MDAC. I recall the Framework installer telling me to install a recent MDAC before proceeding. Anyways, what serious application is not using the System.Data namespace?

                R 1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • L Lost User

                  Yeah you're right, 5.01. But 5.0 is shipped with W98 so that doesn't solve the problem. I think you're wrong regarding MDAC. I recall the Framework installer telling me to install a recent MDAC before proceeding. Anyways, what serious application is not using the System.Data namespace?

                  R Offline
                  R Offline
                  Russell Morris
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #8

                  C a r l wrote: But 5.0 is shipped with W98 so that doesn't solve the problem. True... I bet the download sizes for both updates (5 -> 5.01 and 5.? -> 6.0) are equally intolerable over a modem. C a r l wrote: I think you're wrong regarding MDAC. I recall the Framework installer telling me to install a recent MDAC before proceeding. I'm pretty sure the redistributable doesn't care either way. I seem to remember the way that we found out about this requirement (a year or two ago) is by installing our app on a fresh test machine that didn't have MDAC 2.6 :) The SDK installer may care, however. C a r l wrote: Anyways, what serious application is not using the System.Data namespace? I dunno - not all serious apps need an actual database backend, do they? To be fair, the ones I work on always do ;) -- Russell Morris "So, broccoli, mother says you're good for me... but I'm afraid I'm no good for you!" - Stewy

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  Reply
                  • Reply as topic
                  Log in to reply
                  • Oldest to Newest
                  • Newest to Oldest
                  • Most Votes


                  • Login

                  • Don't have an account? Register

                  • Login or register to search.
                  • First post
                    Last post
                  0
                  • Categories
                  • Recent
                  • Tags
                  • Popular
                  • World
                  • Users
                  • Groups