.NET Framework dependency

Question

When developing a desktop application in .NET, is it possible to not require the .NET Framework? Is developing software in .NET a preferred way to develop desktop applicati

Answer 1

You can still develop applications for the windows desktop using C/C++, eliminating the requirement to the .NET framework, but you'll need to make sure the necessary libraries are already on the system or installed.

The nice thing about the .NET framework is that Windows XP SP2 and Vista has the 3.0 framework runtime installed by default.

In a lot of ways, this is Microsoft's "development standard" and has been that way for a while. This allows you to not worry about having a bunch of libraries tacked onto your application. If you're sticking to all of the .NET provided libraries, you wind up only have to worry about deploying your executable, which is a big headache reliever. When you have a bunch of libraries you have to deploy as well, then you start to run into hassles when you write updates, because you have to make sure those updates are pushed out in your existing installer and to all the existing installed apps out there.

As for "preferred", that always tends to ruffle feathers at times, but there are more and more .NET developers wanted for the web and the desktop at the job hunt sites I tend to visit. 8^D

EDIT: Many thanks to Orion for pointing out my confusion on the frameworks. You get 3.0 "out the gate if you're on XP SP2 or Vista. Everything else is going to require a simple download or run of Windows Update.

Answer 2

I guess what I'm trying to say is that when I look at system requirements for certain software I rarely ever see the .NET Framework as being a requirement. So, I always wonder how they get by without it being a requirement (if they developed the software in .NET). So, I just assume that most commercial software is not written in .NET so that's why I'm asking this question. Hope that cleared some things up.

Many applications developed with C++/MFC for Windows desktops require a specific version of the MFC runtime DLLs even though it may not be explicitly listed as a requirement. I believe the same is becoming true with applications requiring .NET.

For example, the application I work on ships with redistributable files for both .NET and the particular version of MFC that we require as well as a number of other required components. Our install program will install any components not currently installed on the users system. Every release over the past several years has used more .NET code than the previous release.

I do not think it is accurate to assume that most commercial software does not use .NET just because its not listed as a requirement. I don't think you can accurately assume anything from that.

Answer 3

I guess what I'm trying to say is that when I look at system requirements for certain software I rarely ever see the .NET Framework as being a requirement. So, I always wonder how they get by without it being a requirement (if they developed the software in .NET). So, I just assume that most commercial software is not written in .NET so that's why I'm asking this question. Hope that cleared some things up.

Answer 4

You can't run a .Net app without the .Net framework. The framework takes care of some of the more tedious background tasks so you couldn't run the app without the framework.

Answer 5

I guess what I'm trying to say is that when I look at system requirements for certain software I rarely ever see the .NET Framework as being a requirement. So, I always wonder how they get by without it being a requirement (if they developed the software in .NET). So, I just assume that most commercial software is not written in .NET so that's why I'm asking this question. Hope that cleared some things up.

I don't have any numbers, but I'm going to guess that since the majority of folks out there are running XP and Vista on their desktops, listing the .NET framework is moot, especially if they are targeting the 2.0 framework in the application itself. Back in the day, how many applications did you see that said "requires vbrun50.dll" or something to that regard since it was put into the Windows installs by default?

Plus it is a little less "scary" for those that aren't terribly computer saavy. All they want to do is download, install, and run the app. A couple of the apps I have out there require the 2.0 framework and I do get some folks asking what is that and how do I get it and does it cost me anything? The typical answer I give them is "If you're running XP or Vista, there's nothing to worry about" and they seem to like that.

Answer 6

Yes, you can construct an application built in dot NET without using the framework. You can use a program like ESS dotNET FuZe to incorporate any dll, including framework dll's into the application. The resulting EXE does not need a framework anymore.

Please goto this link: http://essaver.net/fuze.html to take a look at FuZe.