.Net framework download size
-
My boss has a project he wants me to convert to .NET. However, he is really concerned about people having to download the Framework, when its around 20 meg to download. It occured to me that it might be possible to develop for the compact framework, and that this might be significantly smaller, as I would assume its for handhelds. So I'd like any advice anybody can offer on the issue. Can you tell me, is the compact f/w able to run on desktops, is it much smaller, is this all worth the hassle? Will Dallas ever return to TV, and will JR get shot again? To make money on this project we have to sell thousands of units of the software, and I don't think we can do that other than by download, and who wants to download an extra 20MB ontop of the current 10MB of the application? Its a tough call. Also, if anybody has any sample code for calling .NET functionality from VB6 I would be vey grateful, as this will help me greatly with the refactoring of future applications. Many thanks. Nursey
-
My boss has a project he wants me to convert to .NET. However, he is really concerned about people having to download the Framework, when its around 20 meg to download. It occured to me that it might be possible to develop for the compact framework, and that this might be significantly smaller, as I would assume its for handhelds. So I'd like any advice anybody can offer on the issue. Can you tell me, is the compact f/w able to run on desktops, is it much smaller, is this all worth the hassle? Will Dallas ever return to TV, and will JR get shot again? To make money on this project we have to sell thousands of units of the software, and I don't think we can do that other than by download, and who wants to download an extra 20MB ontop of the current 10MB of the application? Its a tough call. Also, if anybody has any sample code for calling .NET functionality from VB6 I would be vey grateful, as this will help me greatly with the refactoring of future applications. Many thanks. Nursey
cnurse wrote: It occured to me that it might be possible to develop for the compact framework, and that this might be significantly smaller, as I would assume its for handhelds. So I'd like any advice anybody can offer on the issue. Can you tell me, is the compact f/w able to run on desktops, is it much smaller, is this all worth the hassle? Compact Framework is for devices running Windows CE (which means if you have a CE Desktop, then yes :-)). It is much smaller, but I'm assuming you're running NT, yes? If so, then it's the full framework or not at all. cnurse wrote: To make money on this project we have to sell thousands of units of the software, and I don't think we can do that other than by download, and who wants to download an extra 20MB ontop of the current 10MB of the application? Its a tough call. Well, IE, sends as part of the headers the .NET version if it's installed - so if that header is there you don't need to provide links to the framework, only for users who don't have it. I think for the difference between 10 and 30 meg (as opposed to say, 2 meg and 30 meg), I wouldn't worry about it - only Broadband users are going to really try to pull that down anyway. cnurse wrote: Also, if anybody has any sample code for calling .NET functionality from VB6 I would be vey grateful, as this will help me greatly with the refactoring of future applications. It's easier than that - .NET projects can be registered as COM objects that can be instantiated from VB (there's an option in the projects settings). There's an attribute you apply to the class you wish to expose, and so forth.
Ian Darling "The different versions of the UN*X brand operating system are numbered in a logical sequence: 5, 6, 7, 2, 2.9, 3, 4.0, III, 4.1, V, 4.2, V.2, and 4.3" - Alan Filipski
-
cnurse wrote: It occured to me that it might be possible to develop for the compact framework, and that this might be significantly smaller, as I would assume its for handhelds. So I'd like any advice anybody can offer on the issue. Can you tell me, is the compact f/w able to run on desktops, is it much smaller, is this all worth the hassle? Compact Framework is for devices running Windows CE (which means if you have a CE Desktop, then yes :-)). It is much smaller, but I'm assuming you're running NT, yes? If so, then it's the full framework or not at all. cnurse wrote: To make money on this project we have to sell thousands of units of the software, and I don't think we can do that other than by download, and who wants to download an extra 20MB ontop of the current 10MB of the application? Its a tough call. Well, IE, sends as part of the headers the .NET version if it's installed - so if that header is there you don't need to provide links to the framework, only for users who don't have it. I think for the difference between 10 and 30 meg (as opposed to say, 2 meg and 30 meg), I wouldn't worry about it - only Broadband users are going to really try to pull that down anyway. cnurse wrote: Also, if anybody has any sample code for calling .NET functionality from VB6 I would be vey grateful, as this will help me greatly with the refactoring of future applications. It's easier than that - .NET projects can be registered as COM objects that can be instantiated from VB (there's an option in the projects settings). There's an attribute you apply to the class you wish to expose, and so forth.
Ian Darling "The different versions of the UN*X brand operating system are numbered in a logical sequence: 5, 6, 7, 2, 2.9, 3, 4.0, III, 4.1, V, 4.2, V.2, and 4.3" - Alan Filipski
Ian, Crystal clear as always. Thanks for the help mate. The thing I have in the back of my mind is to run the application which could be developed in .NET, as a web app. There would be the minimum of downloads then, and of course nobody has to work hard to keep up to date with the latest version! 8-) I only have to rollout to one location too, sounds good huh!? Regards, PS:Like your little signature. UN*X can also be seen to be called XENIX, CTIX, AIX....hehe Nursey
-
Ian, Crystal clear as always. Thanks for the help mate. The thing I have in the back of my mind is to run the application which could be developed in .NET, as a web app. There would be the minimum of downloads then, and of course nobody has to work hard to keep up to date with the latest version! 8-) I only have to rollout to one location too, sounds good huh!? Regards, PS:Like your little signature. UN*X can also be seen to be called XENIX, CTIX, AIX....hehe Nursey
cnurse wrote: The thing I have in the back of my mind is to run the application which could be developed in .NET, as a web app. There would be the minimum of downloads then, and of course nobody has to work hard to keep up to date with the latest version! 8-) I only have to rollout to one location too, sounds good huh!? Web apps can be good. HREF-EXEs (also known as ClickOnce or No-Touch Deployment) look better :-) Unfortunately for you, it would seem to be best suited to corporate LANs: http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/dv_vstechart/html/vbtchno-touchdeploymentinnetframework.asp[^] But in the longer term, this might be how a lot of software is deployed in future generally.
Ian Darling "The different versions of the UN*X brand operating system are numbered in a logical sequence: 5, 6, 7, 2, 2.9, 3, 4.0, III, 4.1, V, 4.2, V.2, and 4.3" - Alan Filipski