How widespread is .Net among home users?

[Jim Hubbard]

Anybody know?

[Scott M.]

There haven't been many mainstream user applications (except for some MS
server products & passport) that are built on .NET yet. I do suspect that
will change.

I think right now, .NET is very popular for corporate use.
"Jim Hubbard" <va***@email.ad dress> wrote in message
news:YI******** ***********@big news3.bellsouth .net...

Anybody know?

[Jim Hubbard]

Thanks Scott. Just trying to determine the best platform for my next
project.

Seems like MS would've made .Net EXEs DL only the needed portions from MS as
they are needed to avoid the whole 20MB Framework issue.

But, what do I know?

Jim

"Scott M." <s-***@BADSPAMsnet .net> wrote in message
news:ex******** ******@TK2MSFTN GP09.phx.gbl...

There haven't been many mainstream user applications (except for some MS
server products & passport) that are built on .NET yet. I do suspect that
will change.

I think right now, .NET is very popular for corporate use.
"Jim Hubbard" <va***@email.ad dress> wrote in message
news:YI******** ***********@big news3.bellsouth .net...

Anybody know?

[Daniel O'Connell]

A basic winform app requires the following assemblies:
mscorlib, System, System.Xml, Accessibility,
System.Runtime. Serialization.F ormatters.Soap, System.Drawing, and
System.Windows. Forms. That comes to about 6 meg uncompressed, probably
compresses down aroudn 2-4. Add ontop of that the mscoree.dll and all the
other required runtime dlls(the workstation garbage collector is over 2
megs, as is the server one), and I imagine your resultant package would be
about 10 meg. I don't think that it would be worth it to cut down to 10
megs, which is just as troubling as twenty, IMHO.
Now, if the app is written in VB or J#, additional libraries are *probably*
needed(is it possible to write a vb app that doesn't use anything from
Microsoft.Visua lBasic? If you do so, will the vb compiler allow you to drop
the reference?).
"Jim Hubbard" <va***@email.ad dress> wrote in message
news:kd******** ***********@big news1.bellsouth .net...

Thanks Scott. Just trying to determine the best platform for my next
project.

Seems like MS would've made .Net EXEs DL only the needed portions from MS as they are needed to avoid the whole 20MB Framework issue.

But, what do I know?

Jim

"Scott M." <s-***@BADSPAMsnet .net> wrote in message
news:ex******** ******@TK2MSFTN GP09.phx.gbl...

There haven't been many mainstream user applications (except for some MS
server products & passport) that are built on .NET yet. I do suspect that will change.

I think right now, .NET is very popular for corporate use.
"Jim Hubbard" <va***@email.ad dress> wrote in message
news:YI******** ***********@big news3.bellsouth .net...

Anybody know?

[Jim Hubbard]

"Daniel O'Connell" <[e-mail]> wrote in message
news:%2******** ********@TK2MSF TNGP10.phx.gbl. ..

A basic winform app requires the following assemblies:
mscorlib, System, System.Xml, Accessibility,
System.Runtime. Serialization.F ormatters.Soap, System.Drawing, and
System.Windows. Forms. That comes to about 6 meg uncompressed, probably
compresses down aroudn 2-4. Add ontop of that the mscoree.dll and all the
other required runtime dlls(the workstation garbage collector is over 2
megs, as is the server one), and I imagine your resultant package would be
about 10 meg. I don't think that it would be worth it to cut down to 10
megs, which is just as troubling as twenty, IMHO.
I agree completely....

I use Thinstall to pack my .Net EXEs, but they are still 4-7MB in size.
(Good point is that it makes your code even harder to steal than using an
obfuscator - but if you use an obfuscator *with* Thinstall it makes the code
theft *extremely* unlikely).

What I really need to do is learn C++ and write smaller apps using the MFC.
..Net will be great once the runtime is installed on all Win Pcs. Until then
(1-2 years in the future), who really wants to DL a 20MB file over a modem
connection to run an application? Not me.

What's needed is a really kick-ass application - that people are willing to
go to almost any lengths to get - written in .Net. Maybe file-sharing with
integrated, cross-platform messaging (like a Jabber client) that allows 3rd
party extentions or a really cool implementation of a browser (like Avant
Browser) in .Net or even a spam eliminator for FREE in .Net. (Remember how
3rd party controls really blasted VB out front - along with ease of use - ?
Do that with an app that a lot of people will want to own.)

Then people will be more likely to DL the 20MB .Net framework. (For modem
users you may need to provide a "resume download" thingy to make sure they
get it all.)

Heck! You could just gather a list of all of the FREE .Net applications
known to exist and list them (with links) on a website dedicated to .Net
computing and send out the email to a few friends and ask them to pass it
on - a "Look What You Can Do With .Net!!" kinda site that will make people
want to click the .Net framework link and get some of those FREE .Net apps.

MS really is blowing getting this .Net framework out. Sure businesses use
it, but home users have to use it if it is going to live up to the MS hype -
or if it is going to go mainstream with 3rd party developers.
Now, if the app is written in VB or J#, additional libraries are *probably* needed(is it possible to write a vb app that doesn't use anything from
Microsoft.Visua lBasic? If you do so, will the vb compiler allow you to drop the reference?).
Hmmmm.....not sure.
"Jim Hubbard" <va***@email.ad dress> wrote in message
news:kd******** ***********@big news1.bellsouth .net...

Thanks Scott. Just trying to determine the best platform for my next
project.

Seems like MS would've made .Net EXEs DL only the needed portions from MS

as

they are needed to avoid the whole 20MB Framework issue.

But, what do I know?

Jim

"Scott M." <s-***@BADSPAMsnet .net> wrote in message
news:ex******** ******@TK2MSFTN GP09.phx.gbl...

There haven't been many mainstream user applications (except for some MS server products & passport) that are built on .NET yet. I do suspect

that will change.

I think right now, .NET is very popular for corporate use.
"Jim Hubbard" <va***@email.ad dress> wrote in message
news:YI******** ***********@big news3.bellsouth .net...
> Anybody know?
>
>

[phoenix]

I don't have much to add to the other posts except that more and more users
are installing SP1 for XP which contains the .Net framework so even without
realising it themselfes I think a lot of home users already have it.

Yves

"Jim Hubbard" <va***@email.ad dress> schreef in bericht
news:YI******** ***********@big news3.bellsouth .net...

Anybody know?

[Cor]

Hi Jim,

When in next version (or current selling versions) the Net is a standard
part, you do not have to add it, you get it back as free space using it, in
oposite to systems where you have to add a smaller runtime.

Just a thought,

Cor

[Paul Clement]

On Mon, 29 Dec 2003 01:48:33 -0500, "Scott M." <s-***@BADSPAMsnet .net> wrote:

¤ There haven't been many mainstream user applications (except for some MS
¤ server products & passport) that are built on .NET yet. I do suspect that
¤ will change.
¤
¤ I think right now, .NET is very popular for corporate use.

Not very. The latest version of Symantec's PowerQuest DriveImage uses it but I'm not aware of
another commercial application.
Paul ~~~ pc******@amerit ech.net
Microsoft MVP (Visual Basic)

[Scott M.]

Have you forgotten, that any Windows XP system that has been keeping up with
its updates already has the .NET Framework on it?

In future versions of Windows, .NET will be "baked in" and Automatic Updates
will be turned on from the start. Users won't need to download anything.

Scott M.

"Jim Hubbard" <va***@email.ad dress> wrote in message
news:CE******** ********@bignew s4.bellsouth.ne t...

"Daniel O'Connell" <[e-mail]> wrote in message
news:%2******** ********@TK2MSF TNGP10.phx.gbl. ..

A basic winform app requires the following assemblies:
mscorlib, System, System.Xml, Accessibility,
System.Runtime. Serialization.F ormatters.Soap, System.Drawing, and
System.Windows. Forms. That comes to about 6 meg uncompressed, probably
compresses down aroudn 2-4. Add ontop of that the mscoree.dll and all the

other required runtime dlls(the workstation garbage collector is over 2
megs, as is the server one), and I imagine your resultant package would be about 10 meg. I don't think that it would be worth it to cut down to 10
megs, which is just as troubling as twenty, IMHO.
I agree completely....

I use Thinstall to pack my .Net EXEs, but they are still 4-7MB in size.
(Good point is that it makes your code even harder to steal than using an
obfuscator - but if you use an obfuscator *with* Thinstall it makes the

code theft *extremely* unlikely).

What I really need to do is learn C++ and write smaller apps using the MFC. .Net will be great once the runtime is installed on all Win Pcs. Until then (1-2 years in the future), who really wants to DL a 20MB file over a modem
connection to run an application? Not me.

What's needed is a really kick-ass application - that people are willing to go to almost any lengths to get - written in .Net. Maybe file-sharing with integrated, cross-platform messaging (like a Jabber client) that allows 3rd party extentions or a really cool implementation of a browser (like Avant
Browser) in .Net or even a spam eliminator for FREE in .Net. (Remember how 3rd party controls really blasted VB out front - along with ease of use - ? Do that with an app that a lot of people will want to own.)

Then people will be more likely to DL the 20MB .Net framework. (For modem
users you may need to provide a "resume download" thingy to make sure they
get it all.)

Heck! You could just gather a list of all of the FREE .Net applications
known to exist and list them (with links) on a website dedicated to .Net
computing and send out the email to a few friends and ask them to pass it
on - a "Look What You Can Do With .Net!!" kinda site that will make people
want to click the .Net framework link and get some of those FREE .Net apps.
MS really is blowing getting this .Net framework out. Sure businesses use
it, but home users have to use it if it is going to live up to the MS hype - or if it is going to go mainstream with 3rd party developers.

Now, if the app is written in VB or J#, additional libraries are *probably*

needed(is it possible to write a vb app that doesn't use anything from
Microsoft.Visua lBasic? If you do so, will the vb compiler allow you to

drop

the reference?).

Hmmmm.....not sure.

"Jim Hubbard" <va***@email.ad dress> wrote in message
news:kd******** ***********@big news1.bellsouth .net...

Thanks Scott. Just trying to determine the best platform for my next
project.

Seems like MS would've made .Net EXEs DL only the needed portions from MS

as

they are needed to avoid the whole 20MB Framework issue.

But, what do I know?

Jim

"Scott M." <s-***@BADSPAMsnet .net> wrote in message
news:ex******** ******@TK2MSFTN GP09.phx.gbl...
> There haven't been many mainstream user applications (except for

some MS > server products & passport) that are built on .NET yet. I do

suspect that

> will change.
>
> I think right now, .NET is very popular for corporate use.
>
>
> "Jim Hubbard" <va***@email.ad dress> wrote in message
> news:YI******** ***********@big news3.bellsouth .net...
> > Anybody know?
> >
> >
>
>

[Jim Hubbard]

No, I haven't forgotten. In fact, I specifically remember the .Net
Framework 1.1 showing up in Windows Update. However, It was not a critical
update, and as such would not be downloaded automatically and installed by
the Windows update service.

Why don't non-critical updates get installed automatically like the critical
updates? Who knows?

It is nice that future editions will have .Net baked in, but (as MS is
finding out) not everyone (around 50% of current Windows systems) upgrades
to the newest system. People will only upgrade when it makes financial
sense to do so. MS has failed miserably at making their OS affordable to
most home users - so they will not upgrade.

Besides financial, there's the migration headache. Some stuff may not work
anymore. People have been stung by this little problem before and resist
changing their systems because of it. They need some radically neat toys or
tools to make them want to migrate. Re-hashing the same old stuff just
won't do it.

Then, there is the universal resistance to change that all humans share.
People get comfortable with an OS and they don't want their world turned
upside down. They don't want to learn a new OS (unless they are in IT or
are just geeky) - so why does MS move the menus around and rename the same
old services to something unfamiliar?

Beats me. Maybe MS should invest in a little book entitled "Don't Make Me
Think" by Steve Krug. It's an easy read in an afternoon, and they may just
re-learn something it seems they have forgotten. i.e. Dumb it down and keep
it simple.

Want to make a killer OS (as far as income from sales and platform
distribution is concerned)? Lower the price. Or integrate the ability to
play Xbox games into the OS (after all the Xbox itself is a loss leader -
the real money is in the games). BAM! It's in every home in the free
world!

Then......what do I know?

Jim
"Scott M." <s-***@BADSPAMsnet .net> wrote in message
news:un******** ******@TK2MSFTN GP09.phx.gbl...

Have you forgotten, that any Windows XP system that has been keeping up with its updates already has the .NET Framework on it?

In future versions of Windows, .NET will be "baked in" and Automatic Updates will be turned on from the start. Users won't need to download anything.

Scott M.

"Jim Hubbard" <va***@email.ad dress> wrote in message
news:CE******** ********@bignew s4.bellsouth.ne t...

"Daniel O'Connell" <[e-mail]> wrote in message
news:%2******** ********@TK2MSF TNGP10.phx.gbl. ..

A basic winform app requires the following assemblies:
mscorlib, System, System.Xml, Accessibility,
System.Runtime. Serialization.F ormatters.Soap, System.Drawing, and
System.Windows. Forms. That comes to about 6 meg uncompressed, probably
compresses down aroudn 2-4. Add ontop of that the mscoree.dll and all the other required runtime dlls(the workstation garbage collector is over 2 megs, as is the server one), and I imagine your resultant package would

be

about 10 meg. I don't think that it would be worth it to cut down to

10 megs, which is just as troubling as twenty, IMHO.
I agree completely....

I use Thinstall to pack my .Net EXEs, but they are still 4-7MB in size.
(Good point is that it makes your code even harder to steal than using an obfuscator - but if you use an obfuscator *with* Thinstall it makes the

code

theft *extremely* unlikely).

What I really need to do is learn C++ and write smaller apps using the

MFC.

.Net will be great once the runtime is installed on all Win Pcs. Until

then

(1-2 years in the future), who really wants to DL a 20MB file over a modem connection to run an application? Not me.

What's needed is a really kick-ass application - that people are willing

to

go to almost any lengths to get - written in .Net. Maybe file-sharing

with

integrated, cross-platform messaging (like a Jabber client) that allows

3rd

party extentions or a really cool implementation of a browser (like Avant Browser) in .Net or even a spam eliminator for FREE in .Net. (Remember

how

3rd party controls really blasted VB out front - along with ease of se - ?

Do that with an app that a lot of people will want to own.)

Then people will be more likely to DL the 20MB .Net framework. (For

modem users you may need to provide a "resume download" thingy to make sure they get it all.)

Heck! You could just gather a list of all of the FREE .Net applications
known to exist and list them (with links) on a website dedicated to .Net
computing and send out the email to a few friends and ask them to pass it on - a "Look What You Can Do With .Net!!" kinda site that will make people want to click the .Net framework link and get some of those FREE .Net

apps.

MS really is blowing getting this .Net framework out. Sure businesses use it, but home users have to use it if it is going to live up to the MS

hype -

or if it is going to go mainstream with 3rd party developers.

Now, if the app is written in VB or J#, additional libraries are

*probably*

needed(is it possible to write a vb app that doesn't use anything from
Microsoft.Visua lBasic? If you do so, will the vb compiler allow you to

drop

the reference?).

Hmmmm.....not sure.

"Jim Hubbard" <va***@email.ad dress> wrote in message
news:kd******** ***********@big news1.bellsouth .net...
> Thanks Scott. Just trying to determine the best platform for my next > project.
>
> Seems like MS would've made .Net EXEs DL only the needed portions

from MS

as
> they are needed to avoid the whole 20MB Framework issue.
>
> But, what do I know?
>
> Jim
>
> "Scott M." <s-***@BADSPAMsnet .net> wrote in message
> news:ex******** ******@TK2MSFTN GP09.phx.gbl...
> > There haven't been many mainstream user applications (except for

some

MS

> > server products & passport) that are built on .NET yet. I do

suspect that
> > will change.
> >
> > I think right now, .NET is very popular for corporate use.
> >
> >
> > "Jim Hubbard" <va***@email.ad dress> wrote in message
> > news:YI******** ***********@big news3.bellsouth .net...
> > > Anybody know?
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>