.NET Apps on the PFC homepage
- JohnTHaller
- Posts: 716
- Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 4:44 pm
- Location: New York, NY
- Contact:
.NET Apps on the PFC homepage
I thought Andrew had said that since .NET apps have a local requirement (the .NET framework) that won't be on most public computers that .NET apps would only appear within the .NET category and not appear on the homepage. It would seem that since all .NET apps have dual categories, things like Whitenoir and the WPP Net Menu will show up on the homepage, though. That may be a bit confusing to folks that don't know what .NET is and have an app they carry around that just doesn't work on most public machines like library, net cafe, hotel business center, etc machines that will be running XP without .NET installed.
PortableApps.com - The open standard for portable software | Support Net Neutrality
Re: .NET Apps on the PFC homepage
FYI, winpenpack has also a "read-only" Lite version not using the .NET framework.
I know it because is mentioned here:
http://www.portablefreeware.com/forums/ ... 183#p49183
btw, ZioZione calls it the "NOTnet" alternative (nice "alternative" name ! )
I know it because is mentioned here:
http://www.portablefreeware.com/forums/ ... 183#p49183
btw, ZioZione calls it the "NOTnet" alternative (nice "alternative" name ! )
Last edited by stoned on Mon Mar 19, 2012 10:16 am, edited 1 time in total.
Re: .NET Apps on the PFC homepage
@JohnTHaller
There was a brief discussion about the inclusion of .Net application at http://www.portablefreeware.com/forums/ ... =18&t=7477 but I do not recall a limit for .NET based applications to only appear within it's own category.
I personally do not mind if .net apps are added but I do agree with you that these entries should be clearly marked as .net with a better explanation of the requirements.
Btw, is this page up to date?
@stoned
Are you affiliated with winpenpack?
There was a brief discussion about the inclusion of .Net application at http://www.portablefreeware.com/forums/ ... =18&t=7477 but I do not recall a limit for .NET based applications to only appear within it's own category.
I personally do not mind if .net apps are added but I do agree with you that these entries should be clearly marked as .net with a better explanation of the requirements.
Btw, is this page up to date?
@stoned
Are you affiliated with winpenpack?
Re: .NET Apps on the PFC homepage
At first glance, the it fails to account for the release of version 4.0 of .Net Framework and the upcoming 4.5 version, currently in Beta testing...I am Baas wrote:Btw, is this page up to date?
Re: .NET Apps on the PFC homepage
Nope! I'm an italian fan and happy user of winpenpack suite and their portable proggies!I am Baas wrote:@stoned
Are you affiliated with winpenpack?
As You can see, I follow, more or less, threads over this forum where wPP is mentioned.
btw, I love also a lot of natively portable proggies in evidence on TPFC
- JohnTHaller
- Posts: 716
- Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 4:44 pm
- Location: New York, NY
- Contact:
Re: .NET Apps on the PFC homepage
I wasn't sure if I'd remembered it correctly or not in terms of how PFC was handling it. On PortableApps.com, .NET apps will be hidden by default and not appear on the homepage. Users can tick a box with an explanation of the issues (not fully portable as it won't work on most 'public' PCs, requirements of .NET of specific version in relation to OS, requiring admin rights to install, etc) and then have them appear alongside everything else on the website and within the platform's app directory (like we do now with 'advanced' apps like beta releases).I am Baas wrote:There was a brief discussion about the inclusion of .Net application at http://www.portablefreeware.com/forums/ ... =18&t=7477 but I do not recall a limit for .NET based applications to only appear within it's own category.
While most techies should know what .NET is, you'd be surprised by how many think it's on the vast majority of machines (it isn't) and that it is automatically distributed via Windows Update to all users (it isn't).I am Baas wrote:I personally do not mind if .net apps are added but I do agree with you that these entries should be clearly marked as .net with a better explanation of the requirements.
Not yet. It's on my todo list, though. I know neither .NET 4.0 or 4.5 are being automatically pushed to Windows Vista users and no .NET framework at all is automatically pushed to Windows XP users (other than security updates once you have manually selected to install it), but I don't know if Windows 7 is pushing .NET 4.0 or 4.5 out automatically (Windows 7 comes with 3.5 which includes compatibility with most 1.0, 1.1, 2.0 and 3.0 apps except those that are affected by "Breaking Changes"). We also need to worry about Client Profile vs Full .NET installs with many apps as well now, which gets even more complicated. Even though a given PC may have had a user manually install .NET 4.0 Client Profile, if an app requires 'Full' it will still fail to run. Does your head hurt yet, too?I am Baas wrote:Btw, is this page up to date?
PortableApps.com - The open standard for portable software | Support Net Neutrality
Re: .NET Apps on the PFC homepage
@JohnTHaller
Thanks for that. Now, if you are willing to consolidate all of your comments made in this thread and add to that list this one about .net, I will be much obliged. I will start a new topic at http://www.portablefreeware.com/forums/ ... m.php?f=18 as suggested by webfork. I hope you do not find me rude for asking you to do this but I do not have much time right now.
Thanks for clarifying. I asked because your comment was off-topic and you came across as a fanboy more than anything else.
Thanks for that. Now, if you are willing to consolidate all of your comments made in this thread and add to that list this one about .net, I will be much obliged. I will start a new topic at http://www.portablefreeware.com/forums/ ... m.php?f=18 as suggested by webfork. I hope you do not find me rude for asking you to do this but I do not have much time right now.
@stonedwebfork wrote:Baas: Sounds good. If you'd be so kind as to create a separate thread and we'll start putting together what specifically needs fixing with site policy. I'll draft something and ask Andrew to make it live.I am Baas wrote:the points made in his comments are accurate. This should be the topic of this discussion, not us vs. them thing. Let's use it as a cause for improving TPFC experience.
Thanks for clarifying. I asked because your comment was off-topic and you came across as a fanboy more than anything else.
Re: .NET Apps on the PFC homepage
You are right, my apologies! I was not 100% able to understand first JTH post. My English is not so good!I am Baas wrote: @stoned
Thanks for clarifying. I asked because your comment was off-topic and you came across as a fanboy more than anything else.
After a better reading, now I understand my comment was not in-topic.