* The Business of Software

A former community discussing the business of software, from the smallest shareware operation to Microsoft. A part of Joel on Software.

We're closed, folks!

Links:

» Business of Software FAQ
» The Business of Software Conference (held every fall, usually in Boston)
» Forum guidelines (Please read before posting!)

Moderators:

Andy Brice
Successful Software

Doug Nebeker ("Doug")

Jonathan Matthews
Creator of DeepTrawl, CloudTrawl, and LeapDoc

Nicholas Hebb
BreezeTree Software

Bob Walsh
host, Startup Success Podcast author of The Web Startup Success Guide and Micro-ISV: From Vision To Reality

Patrick McKenzie
Bingo Card Creator

Distributing .NET desktop applications

Anyone care to share if they have experience with this and specifically if there are a lot of support issues regarding different versions.
codingreal Send private email
Sunday, July 28, 2013
 
 
Sorry. I am referring to different versions of the .net framework
codingreal Send private email
Sunday, July 28, 2013
 
 
Yes, there are issues related to this. But the question you're asking is very broad. What versions of the .NET framework are you targeting? What versions of Windows are you targeting?

We need more information about what you're trying to do.
Wyatt O'Day Send private email
Sunday, July 28, 2013
 
 
"What versions of the .NET framework are you targeting?" 4.0

"What versions of Windows are you targeting?" Windows 7,8 and xp
codingreal Send private email
Sunday, July 28, 2013
 
 
Win 7 and 8 users should be up to date, and [insert random number]% of XP users will not have the 4.0 client profile installed. You do need to make sure your installer has 4.0 as a prerequisite, but other than that there aren't really support issues. I suspect when people have installation issues due to the .NET framework, they either install the prerequisites or abort the trial install. Most people don't go out of their way to report problems.
Nicholas Hebb Send private email
Sunday, July 28, 2013
 
 
My product, which is a WPF based diagramming application, also requires .NET Framework 4.0 plus a somewhat capable computer (in the 2.2GHz + 2GB RAM range), running Windows XP or superior.

Except by two potential users which cannot execute it, I have not had any troubles with those minimum requirements.

Just make sure that the min reqs are clearly stated in the download page and readme file.
Néstor Sánchez A. Send private email
Sunday, July 28, 2013
 
 
I've been distributing a .NET 2.0 app for a couple of years and never had a problem with it.  The installer detects for and installs the .NET re-distributable if it isn't present on the target machine.
Mark Nemtsas Send private email
Monday, July 29, 2013
 
 
Windows XP: .NET 4.0 is an optional update available from Windows Update.

Windows 7: .NET 4.0 is an optional update available from Windows Update.

Windows 8: .NET 4.0 is installed and enabled by default, but can be disabled from the "Programs and Features" control panel.




So you need to include the .NET 4.0 bootstrapper for pre-Windows 8. For Windows 8+ you need to detect if .NET 4.0 is installed, and if it isn't then, instead of installing .NET 4.0, enable the feature.
Wyatt O'Day Send private email
Monday, July 29, 2013
 
 
The only issue we had was when we were still using .NET 2.0 and Windows 8 came out. Windows 8 intercepts the small 2.0 installer (about 20MB) and forces the full .NET 3.5 SP1 installer (a few hundred MB and includes 2.0)

We were about to upgrade to 4.0 anyway and this tipped us over the edge. We have fewer XP customers with 4.0 pre-installed than had 2.0 pre-installed but it isn't a deal breaker for us.
Adrian Lock Send private email
Monday, July 29, 2013
 
 
Thank you all for your comments. It has been helpful.
codingreal Send private email
Monday, July 29, 2013
 
 
*
The only issue we had was when we were still using .NET 2.0 and Windows 8 came out. Windows 8 intercepts the small 2.0 installer (about 20MB) and forces the full .NET 3.5 SP1 installer (a few hundred MB and includes 2.0)
*

Do you include the .NET installer in your distributable?  I don't.  I have the installer download it from the MS websites.  When it came to .NET 2.0 in W8 I came up with a nice way of detecting and installing the .NET 4.0 feature.  It works really well (I am using inno).
Mark Nemtsas Send private email
Tuesday, July 30, 2013
 
 
>Do you include the .NET installer in your distributable?  I don't.

We ship .NET 4 client as part of the install package. The reason being, I don't trust the user not to abandon the install when a second download begins - it's one more decision they have to make, and it's better that they don't have to make it.

With the DevExpress dlls we also ship, that makes our .net product a 65mb download. Makes no difference. These days, with broadband everywhere, no one cares about a 65mb download. If anything, it adds weight to the product, giving the impression that it's a meaty piece of software.
Marlee Ammon Send private email
Wednesday, July 31, 2013
 
 
"If anything, it adds weight to the product, giving the impression that it's a meaty piece of software. "

Now that is a unique angle!
codingreal Send private email
Thursday, August 01, 2013
 
 
"Now that is a unique angle! "

Back when I used to distribute software on CDs I'd be embarassed at only taking up 30 MB of the disk
Drummer Send private email
Thursday, August 01, 2013
 
 
There is something there. For example if there's a $500 application, I'd think 1MB was too small to be worth that (ridiculous and illogical as that is). On the other side when it gets to 200MB I'd be cautious about downloading because of my slow broadband.
Jonathan Matthews Send private email
Thursday, August 01, 2013
 
 
Personally I think bundling in a .NET re-distributable that is on most machines already isn't the best idea.  People are used to applications that download updates from the 'net on installation these days.

As to the idea that the increased size of the download increases the perceived quality of the download....interesting.  I can remember spending a whole day (back in 2003) DECREASING the size of an installer as much as I could.  The general consensus back then was make it small and make it fast. 

These days it could be argued that time spent making your installer smaller is wasted because of the prevalence of higher speed downloads.  Even down here in Australia (the back end of the connectivity world as far as I am concerned) a 50MB download is nothing.
Mark Nemtsas Send private email
Thursday, August 01, 2013
 
 

This topic is archived. No further replies will be accepted.

Other recent topics Other recent topics
 
Powered by FogBugz