Stand Alone EXE

[David Pendrey]

I was wondering if it is at all posible to write a stand alone .EXE program
in Visual Studio .NET. Hopefully in VB.NET but if not another language would
be ok. Thanks for the assistance

[Michael A. Covington]

Re: Stand Alone EXE


"David Pendrey" <fairydave@dodo .com.au> wrote in message
news:423a593b$1 @news.comindico .com.au...[color=blue]
>I was wondering if it is at all posible to write a stand alone .EXE program
>in Visual Studio .NET. Hopefully in VB.NET but if not another language
>would be ok. Thanks for the assistance[/color]

Yes. Visual Studio programs (VB, C#, etc.) normally compile to a single
..EXE file. This file will only run on computers that have .NET Framework
installed, but it's a single .EXE file.

[Jim Hubbard]

Re: Stand Alone EXE


"Michael A. Covington" <look@ai.uga.ed u.for.address> wrote in message
news:OxYS9V3KFH A.1608@TK2MSFTN GP12.phx.gbl...[color=blue]
>
> "David Pendrey" <fairydave@dodo .com.au> wrote in message
> news:423a593b$1 @news.comindico .com.au...[color=green]
>>I was wondering if it is at all posible to write a stand alone .EXE
>>program in Visual Studio .NET. Hopefully in VB.NET but if not another
>>language would be ok. Thanks for the assistance[/color]
>
> Yes. Visual Studio programs (VB, C#, etc.) normally compile to a single
> .EXE file. This file will only run on computers that have .NET Framework
> installed, but it's a single .EXE file.[/color]

Or, you can use Thinstall to wrap the exe and only the portions of the .Net
framework that it uses into a single executable that can be run on any
computer - with or without the .Net framework installed.

Jim Hubbard

[David Pendrey]

Re: Stand Alone EXE

Thank you very much Jim! Would you be able to give me some direction on how
to use this application to wrap my applications into working? Preferably I
would like to just release a single .EXE program simply because its such a
small program it doesn't warrant a whole 20 meg package to get it working.
Thank you so much fo ryour assistance


"Jim Hubbard" <reply@groups.p lease> wrote in message
news:Ir2dnR94hf-u_qffRVn-rg@giganews.com ...[color=blue]
>
> "Michael A. Covington" <look@ai.uga.ed u.for.address> wrote in message
> news:OxYS9V3KFH A.1608@TK2MSFTN GP12.phx.gbl...[color=green]
>>
>> "David Pendrey" <fairydave@dodo .com.au> wrote in message
>> news:423a593b$1 @news.comindico .com.au...[color=darkred]
>>>I was wondering if it is at all posible to write a stand alone .EXE
>>>program in Visual Studio .NET. Hopefully in VB.NET but if not another
>>>language would be ok. Thanks for the assistance[/color]
>>
>> Yes. Visual Studio programs (VB, C#, etc.) normally compile to a single
>> .EXE file. This file will only run on computers that have .NET Framework
>> installed, but it's a single .EXE file.[/color]
>
> Or, you can use Thinstall to wrap the exe and only the portions of the
> .Net framework that it uses into a single executable that can be run on
> any computer - with or without the .Net framework installed.
>
> Jim Hubbard
>[/color]

[J L]

Re: Stand Alone EXE

Hi Jim,
Have you used Thinstall? If so, how much did it cost? And what is your
opinion of it?

TIA,
John

On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 00:11:54 -0500, "Jim Hubbard"
<reply@groups.p lease> wrote:
[color=blue]
>
>"Michael A. Covington" <look@ai.uga.ed u.for.address> wrote in message
>news:OxYS9V3KF HA.1608@TK2MSFT NGP12.phx.gbl.. .[color=green]
>>
>> "David Pendrey" <fairydave@dodo .com.au> wrote in message
>> news:423a593b$1 @news.comindico .com.au...[color=darkred]
>>>I was wondering if it is at all posible to write a stand alone .EXE
>>>program in Visual Studio .NET. Hopefully in VB.NET but if not another
>>>language would be ok. Thanks for the assistance[/color]
>>
>> Yes. Visual Studio programs (VB, C#, etc.) normally compile to a single
>> .EXE file. This file will only run on computers that have .NET Framework
>> installed, but it's a single .EXE file.[/color]
>
>Or, you can use Thinstall to wrap the exe and only the portions of the .Net
>framework that it uses into a single executable that can be run on any
>computer - with or without the .Net framework installed.
>
>Jim Hubbard
>[/color]

[Jim Hubbard]

Re: Stand Alone EXE


"David Pendrey" <fairydave@dodo .com.au> wrote in message
news:423a667f$1 @news.comindico .com.au...[color=blue]
> Thank you very much Jim! Would you be able to give me some direction on
> how to use this application to wrap my applications into working?
> Preferably I would like to just release a single .EXE program simply
> because its such a small program it doesn't warrant a whole 20 meg package
> to get it working. Thank you so much fo ryour assistance[/color]

After you create your application, you run Thinstall and point it to your
exe. Thinstall then finds all related files and portions of the .Net
framework that your EXE needs and wraps the whole thing into a single EXE
that can be run without installation. This helps in a couple of ways....

First, you never have your application's files overwritten (i.e. DLL Hell).
Second, your users don't need administrative rights to run the application.
Third, your users don't need the .Net framework installed.

Thinstall even creates a virtual registry on-the-fly that your application
uses so that there are no changes to the users registry.

Of course Thinstall can be programmed to make permanent registry entries and
even to leave files on the users system (such as database files or image
files that your app may create). Thinstall also handles licensing for you.
It's really all up to you.

Thinstall is used by a huge host of companies (like Quickbooks), government
agencies and every branch of the armed forces.

I haven't talked to Jonathon Clark (President of Thinstall) in a few weeks.
The last time we talked, he had mentioned that they were working on a new
pricing scheme to be more flexible for small companies and large. So, I am
not sure what the pricing structure is right now.

Whatever it is, you can get an extra 5% off by mentioning jim__hubbard @
hotmail . com . Tell Jonathon I sent you. He's a great guy and his staff
are very helpful. www.thinstall.com

Hope this helps......
[color=blue]
>
>
> "Jim Hubbard" <reply@groups.p lease> wrote in message
> news:Ir2dnR94hf-u_qffRVn-rg@giganews.com ...[color=green]
>>
>> "Michael A. Covington" <look@ai.uga.ed u.for.address> wrote in message
>> news:OxYS9V3KFH A.1608@TK2MSFTN GP12.phx.gbl...[color=darkred]
>>>
>>> "David Pendrey" <fairydave@dodo .com.au> wrote in message
>>> news:423a593b$1 @news.comindico .com.au...
>>>>I was wondering if it is at all posible to write a stand alone .EXE
>>>>program in Visual Studio .NET. Hopefully in VB.NET but if not another
>>>>language would be ok. Thanks for the assistance
>>>
>>> Yes. Visual Studio programs (VB, C#, etc.) normally compile to a single
>>> .EXE file. This file will only run on computers that have .NET
>>> Framework installed, but it's a single .EXE file.[/color]
>>
>> Or, you can use Thinstall to wrap the exe and only the portions of the
>> .Net framework that it uses into a single executable that can be run on
>> any computer - with or without the .Net framework installed.
>>
>> Jim Hubbard
>>[/color]
>
>[/color]

[Jim Hubbard]

Re: Stand Alone EXE


"J L" <john@marymonte .com> wrote in message
news:jark311fag 7vv29344q266i10 jncj2n6sb@4ax.c om...[color=blue]
> Hi Jim,
> Have you used Thinstall? If so, how much did it cost? And what is your
> opinion of it?[/color]

The pricing structure has changed. You'd have to contact Thinstall
(www.thinstall.com) for current pricing. But, you can get an extra 5% off
if you mention code jim__hubbard @ hotmail . com (remove the sp@ces).

I definitely use it. It's great! No worries about distributing the .Net
framework.

Actually.....di stributing the .Net framework is more of a bandwidth thing
than a real problem. The problem comes in when the user tries to install
the .Net framework. Unless you are on a completely clean PC, installing the
..Net framework can be problematic. Then your customers are calling you for
support with a Microsoft product and that just sucks.

With the Thinstall EXE, all they have to do is double click it and they are
off and running (unless you configure Thinstall to handle licensing - in
which case they need to enter the appropriate keys to register the
software).

It is the coolest, (somewhat unknown) application out there for developers.

I wouldn't distribute .Net apps without it.

One more thing.......Net applications in a Thinstall EXE are safe against
ildasm (disassembling) and don't need obfuscators to keep your code
fromprying eyes. This is what originally sold me on Thinstall.

I wrote some about it a while back on my blog at
http://poderthis.blogspot.com/.

Hope this helps!

Jim Hubbard
[color=blue]
>
> TIA,
> John
>
> On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 00:11:54 -0500, "Jim Hubbard"
> <reply@groups.p lease> wrote:
>[color=green]
>>
>>"Michael A. Covington" <look@ai.uga.ed u.for.address> wrote in message
>>news:OxYS9V3K FHA.1608@TK2MSF TNGP12.phx.gbl. ..[color=darkred]
>>>
>>> "David Pendrey" <fairydave@dodo .com.au> wrote in message
>>> news:423a593b$1 @news.comindico .com.au...
>>>>I was wondering if it is at all posible to write a stand alone .EXE
>>>>program in Visual Studio .NET. Hopefully in VB.NET but if not another
>>>>language would be ok. Thanks for the assistance
>>>
>>> Yes. Visual Studio programs (VB, C#, etc.) normally compile to a single
>>> .EXE file. This file will only run on computers that have .NET
>>> Framework
>>> installed, but it's a single .EXE file.[/color]
>>
>>Or, you can use Thinstall to wrap the exe and only the portions of the
>>.Net
>>framework that it uses into a single executable that can be run on any
>>computer - with or without the .Net framework installed.
>>
>>Jim Hubbard
>>[/color]
>[/color]

[Cor Ligthert]

Re: Stand Alone EXE

Jim,
[color=blue]
> The problem comes in when the user tries to install the .Net framework.
> Unless you are on a completely clean PC, installing the .Net framework can
> be problematic. Then your customers are calling you for support with a
> Microsoft product and that just sucks.
>[/color]
I can me not remember that I ever heard about what you wrote above in any
newsgroup I am active in..

Can you give some samples for situations where you have got those.

Cor

[Cor Ligthert]

Re: Stand Alone EXE

David,

What you ask now is endless asked times before in these newsgroups.

Be aware that the Net framework is in fact nothing more than a
servicepack/extension over the OS, what could be made by any vendor of
operating systems to let the programs made with the ILS language run and
provide with that extra's as by instance better memorymanagemen t.

A lot of us have had in past more than once problems with different runtimes
for more versions of a language.

That is gone with NET

When you want a real small program, than there is in Visual Studio Net the
C++ unmanaged code part for things as drivers etc.

I hope this helps,

Cor

[David Pendrey]

Re: Stand Alone EXE

Cor,

It is a shame that they did not think it was an important part of
programming. For large, complicated programs then a package distribution
such as that is the way to go, but for small programs (i.e. notepad) there
should be the option to compile a stand alone .EXE file. However I have
recently learnt of a 3rd party application ('Thinstall') which will perform
this task for you. Thanks for your help


"Cor Ligthert" <notmyfirstname @planet.nl> wrote in message
news:eqG5ha5KFH A.580@TK2MSFTNG P15.phx.gbl...[color=blue]
> David,
>
> What you ask now is endless asked times before in these newsgroups.
>
> Be aware that the Net framework is in fact nothing more than a
> servicepack/extension over the OS, what could be made by any vendor of
> operating systems to let the programs made with the ILS language run and
> provide with that extra's as by instance better memorymanagemen t.
>
> A lot of us have had in past more than once problems with different
> runtimes for more versions of a language.
>
> That is gone with NET
>
> When you want a real small program, than there is in Visual Studio Net the
> C++ unmanaged code part for things as drivers etc.
>
> I hope this helps,
>
> Cor
>[/color]

[Cor Ligthert]

Re: Stand Alone EXE

David,

I think that you did not read my message. When that is not enough, read the
concept of the Net. It is not something of one minute thinking. There is as
well done things as I wrote to overcome all things from runtimes with
different versions.

When you add something as ThinInstall, than that is not a single running
Exe. Which in fact don't exist since the time of windows for screen
operations. It only still exist for things as commandline and driver
operations on Win32 systems.

A program that uses a window (form) can never be a small exe when there is
not something used as now a OS extension as Net or a runtime.

The ones who insert in those programs direct handling of the window, do
remind me on those people who in the beginning of MS-Dos were using direct
screen handling by the OS (pseudo mem) addresses for that. That has given
the most problems when Windows started to keep those programs running and
where the first programs from which was told that they would not go anymore.

The reason for the developers of that was that than they could keep the
programs small and that those were faster. They found themselves very clever
guys. But professionals (than and now most) called those guys fools.

It is a shame that some developers do only one minute thinking.

Cor

[David Pendrey]

Re: Stand Alone EXE

If it is not possible to have a small EXE program which includes a form then
how is notepad only 68kb? It includes several forms and depends only on the
windows system behind it. There is a difference between 'minute thingking'
and weighing the possabilities.

For small, simple programs it is often worth while to add a little bit extra
size onto the file and have it take a little bit longer to load to keep it a
stand alone. After all, its still a small program, and still loads in what
is a very usable time frame.

You can't just optimise all the time at the expense of usability and
distribution. If people had to download the 22 meg .NET framework to
download a program to read RTF files they would not get it. But if the
program takes a few extra seconds to load ands takes up an extra meg on
their hard drive it is much more user friendly.

From what I can understand the THInstall program simply moves the API
functions calls from the .NET framework into your EXE program. The program
maintains its functionality on Windows 98 and above irrespective of if the
..NET framework is installed and if so which version.


"Cor Ligthert" <notmyfirstname @planet.nl> wrote in message
news:OFI4185KFH A.3788@tk2msftn gp13.phx.gbl...[color=blue]
> David,
>
> I think that you did not read my message. When that is not enough, read
> the concept of the Net. It is not something of one minute thinking. There
> is as well done things as I wrote to overcome all things from runtimes
> with different versions.
>
> When you add something as ThinInstall, than that is not a single running
> Exe. Which in fact don't exist since the time of windows for screen
> operations. It only still exist for things as commandline and driver
> operations on Win32 systems.
>
> A program that uses a window (form) can never be a small exe when there is
> not something used as now a OS extension as Net or a runtime.
>
> The ones who insert in those programs direct handling of the window, do
> remind me on those people who in the beginning of MS-Dos were using direct
> screen handling by the OS (pseudo mem) addresses for that. That has given
> the most problems when Windows started to keep those programs running and
> where the first programs from which was told that they would not go
> anymore.
>
> The reason for the developers of that was that than they could keep the
> programs small and that those were faster. They found themselves very
> clever guys. But professionals (than and now most) called those guys
> fools.
>
> It is a shame that some developers do only one minute thinking.
>
> Cor
>[/color]

[Alejandro Lapeyre]

Re: Stand Alone EXE

Cor..

You used...?

mov ah,09
int 21h

or...

mov ah,..
int 10h

or
mov es,video_segmen t
mov di,
....

The speed differences where abismal!

Of course it caused problems for windows (At least with 8086 and 80286), but
the OS should have provided a decent video output routine! Anyway, text
based output was so fast that a complete screen redraw would only take
4kbytes, so even for windows that wasnt a big deal.

Regards,
Alejandro Lapeyre


"Cor Ligthert" <notmyfirstname @planet.nl> escribió en el mensaje
news:OFI4185KFH A.3788@tk2msftn gp13.phx.gbl...[color=blue]
> David,
>
> I think that you did not read my message. When that is not enough, read
> the concept of the Net. It is not something of one minute thinking. There
> is as well done things as I wrote to overcome all things from runtimes
> with different versions.
>
> When you add something as ThinInstall, than that is not a single running
> Exe. Which in fact don't exist since the time of windows for screen
> operations. It only still exist for things as commandline and driver
> operations on Win32 systems.
>
> A program that uses a window (form) can never be a small exe when there is
> not something used as now a OS extension as Net or a runtime.
>
> The ones who insert in those programs direct handling of the window, do
> remind me on those people who in the beginning of MS-Dos were using direct
> screen handling by the OS (pseudo mem) addresses for that. That has given
> the most problems when Windows started to keep those programs running and
> where the first programs from which was told that they would not go
> anymore.
>
> The reason for the developers of that was that than they could keep the
> programs small and that those were faster. They found themselves very
> clever guys. But professionals (than and now most) called those guys
> fools.
>
> It is a shame that some developers do only one minute thinking.
>
> Cor
>[/color]

[Herfried K. Wagner [MVP]]

Re: Stand Alone EXE

"Michael A. Covington" <look@ai.uga.ed u.for.address> schrieb:[color=blue][color=green]
>>I was wondering if it is at all posible to write a stand alone .EXE
>>program in Visual Studio .NET. Hopefully in VB.NET but if not another
>>language would be ok. Thanks for the assistance[/color]
>
> Yes. Visual Studio programs (VB, C#, etc.) normally compile to a single
> .EXE file. This file will only run on computers that have .NET Framework
> installed, but it's a single .EXE file.[/color]

Note that all components used by the application must be available on the
target machine too.

--
M S Herfried K. Wagner
M V P <URL:http://dotnet.mvps.org/>
V B <URL:http://classicvb.org/petition/>

[Jim Hubbard]

Re: Stand Alone EXE


"David Pendrey" <fairydave@dodo .com.au> wrote in message
news:423aa679$1 @news.comindico .com.au...[color=blue]
> If it is not possible to have a small EXE program which includes a form
> then how is notepad only 68kb? It includes several forms and depends only
> on the windows system behind it. There is a difference between 'minute
> thingking' and weighing the possabilities.
>
> For small, simple programs it is often worth while to add a little bit
> extra size onto the file and have it take a little bit longer to load to
> keep it a stand alone. After all, its still a small program, and still
> loads in what is a very usable time frame.
>
> You can't just optimise all the time at the expense of usability and
> distribution. If people had to download the 22 meg .NET framework to
> download a program to read RTF files they would not get it.[/color]

And, presently they may have to download the .Net Framework up to 3 times
(1.0, 1.1 and 2.0) to run all .Net applications because none of the
frameworks are backwards compatible with it's siblings! We have simply
swapped DLL Hell for .Net Framework Hell.

Since you cannot know what version of .Net your user may have (if any) you
must ship the .Net runtime with all of your applications (or use Thinstall
to wrap them).

It simply amazes me that Microsoft did not make .Net exes automatically
download only the portions of the .Net runtime they need (from Microsoft) to
run. A program written in .Net and stored on an internet server will do
this. It only downloads the DLLs it requires for the functionality that the
user is attempting to use. So why not have it do the same for the whole
damned framework?

A second thing that just boggles my mind is why the .Net framework is not a
"Critical" update for XP+. If Microsoft is moving to this platform, then it
is needed on every Windows desktop. Why don't they make it a critical
update and force it onto the desktops?

Then we could ship very tiny applications because we would not need to ship
the runtimes. And, that whole XCOPY thing they were so high on might
actually work. As it stands you cannot rely on Xcopy to distribute an
application because you cannot rely on the correct (if any) .Net framework
to be on the end user's PC.
[color=blue]
>But if the program takes a few extra seconds to load ands takes up an extra
>meg on their hard drive it is much more user friendly.[/color]

Thinstall apps are still a lot larger than a simple exe output from .Net. I
did an experiment with Washington University's .Net rewrite of the classic
Paint program. If you downloaded the .Net framework and the code needed to
run Paint 2.0 it added up to over 27 MB. The same application compiled with
Thinstall was just over 14 MB and needed no installation, needed no
administrator privikeges, and will never have its files overwritten or
corrupted because they are all inside the Thinstall EXE.

Why didn't Microsoft think of this? They have seen and used Thinstall, and
even spoke well of it.