The Portable Freeware Collection Forums

http://me.codeplex.com/

MouseExtender is a cosy utility with shortcuts to programs, folders and system functions (Control panel, Restart and Shutdown).
This program allows you to improve your productivity. It is extremely simple and fully customizable.

I do like its features more than rocket/object docks, but it isnt as easy to customize for looks

Not an issue for me but be aware that this requires .NET Framework 3.5.

(PS ... isn't it about time that such apps were permitted in the Database)

I did my first try (submission) on .net apps using this one.
I'm not rating it though. I'm just curious to see how it goes.

Use "[@]" in the search field to see it.

Edit: already a score of 5 ... half way there ... could this be the one?

hm, didnt know about the .net thing :S but if it helps there is an illegal .net portable program... well think it's illegal :S microsoft wouldnt just let someone use their .net for free like that anyways lol

I'm a big Java fan and when I first came to PFW, I definitely agreed with Joby, but I've gradually been pulled the other direction. Here's my argument against accepting either .NET (or Java) and it depends mostly upon your definition of portable. Portable is software that will run on most computers without any effort/install/configuration; you just plug and go. Since most desktop computers don't have .NET, applications that use this framework are by very nature not portable.

XP is THE portable computer destination

According to this site: http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_os.asp Windows XP covers around 63.3% of the world's computers, although that number is probably much higher since servers systems are usually not Windows XP. For example, although the referenced site above lists Windows 2003, that's an almost exclusively server OS, as are most Linux computers.

This will invariably change but probably not for at least 3 more years and there's a few reasons why. First, as Windows 7 takes off, XP will maintain itself for low-end systems, which make up the bulk of computers available to the average user. Second, whether its good or bad, XP is much easier to pirate, meaning people in low income areas are more likely to use XP. Third, existing software also maintains this because Vista and Win 7 are dramatic OS rewrites not compatible with quite a lot of XP software already here on the site. XP has a lot of inertia.

But XP runs .NET!

Although XP runs .NET, most users don't install software on their own and if you use a computer lab, it probably doesn't have .NET or Java. Why would it? That's just more work for the administrator. .NET doesn't show up on XP unless there's a specific need.

Also, even if you have admin rights an individual system, installing .NET takes quite a bit of time. Even with a fast computer and fast net connection its still far from instant.

Unfortunate but true

So although there are a wealth of great .NET and Java applications, they still aren't by this definition portable. I would therefore recommend that users who want these tools to be added to the database shouldn't focus on getting them listed as portable anyway. They should look at how to make the libraries and tools attached to these software systems work smoothly and easily off a USB drive.

PortableApps has made some inroads on this but I have yet to see a packaged and ready-to-go Java or .NET setup.

Please disagree with me

As much as I like being right, I much prefer being able to use more applications on more computers. So please respond if I've gotten it backwards.

But you still have to consider one thing: maybe not all, but the majority of people coming here are passionate about softwares, about trying new ones every day, and testing them.

If we'd make a poll about whether you have .net installed or not, I bet it's gonna be over 75% in favor of "yes".

All the windows computers I have access to have .net, either because of windows update, either because I installed it (again, not because I'm a fan of .net but from time to time I encounter apps that I really have to try; I must admit though that there are few .net apps I do enjoy using).
The percentage of people like me is small I guess, but the percentage of people that have .net present on their main machines (the ones that count) is big. For the other ones (libraries, net cafes) it is easy to work with the equivalent .net independent apps (I didn't find 'till date an important .net app that doesn't have a .net independent equivalent one).

Anyways, I am a firm believer of people right to choose! (still, giving the fact that TPFC is the project of one, I think Andrew should have the final word).

Just my 2 cents.

joby_toss wrote:I did my first try (submission) on .net apps using this one.
I'm not rating it though.

Turns out the proposed app gets rated automatically by its submitter. 'Just noticed it now that you can check the apps raters (is this the correct term?).

Turns out the proposed app gets rated automatically by its submitter.

Makes sense, doesn't it? However, you can remove it using the "sucks" button.

I'm not rating it though. I'm just curious to see how it goes.

I am also curious to see how the .NET experiment goes.



But Java still turns me off though, for three reasons:

1) Even lower availability compared to .NET

2) 99.9% Java apps are portable, so what's the point? They don't write to the registry. Some write settings to the user profile folder, but makes it trivial for you to redirect the settings to another folder (eg. app folder)

3) Very resource hungry