Page 1 of 1

How about "Portable Freeware Requiring .NET or Java&quo

Posted: Sat Feb 21, 2009 10:10 am
by ashghost
I've wanted to make this suggestion for months.

For one thing, I get tired of seeing things like:
New Forum Member A wrote:Try this great portable app!
Old Hand B wrote:Requires .NET
New Forum Member A wrote:But it's still portable! Everything has .NET these days!
Old Hand C wrote:See the sticky, the "About" page, and the FAQ.
But it's also due to the fact that I use quite a few .NET applications (and a couple of Java apps - Jalbum and Freemind are worth it!). My main reason for using portable apps has been for the ease of maintaining a single application repository that's synced between my laptop and desktop, with the third copy on a USB drive for the rare case when I use another machine.

I wonder how many forum members come across a .NET application that they think is amazing, but know better than to submit it here? Seeing XdN tweaker submitted this week was what did it. My first thought was, "How could that not have been submitted before?".

I know that new members would still end up submitting .NET apps to the main submission thread, but it seems like it would be easier (and more likely to sound polite) to say "This belongs in the semi-portable thread".

How about "Portable Freeware Requiring .NET or Java&

Posted: Sun Feb 22, 2009 11:53 am
by stevegutry
There is an old saying "Horses for courses".
I personally prefer a clean & lean operating system which is more reliable. I use XP pro stripped with Nlite. I have installed both java & dot net in the past but decided to remove them in the interests of having a faster more responsive computer. I also have portable java for the odd occasion when I must run a java program. If I really want to test out a dot net program then I normally do it on a spare computer & Ghost back the OS after testing. I have nothing against java & dot net - I just hate computer bloat.

However some people like to install java & dot net. This is the joy of having freedom of choice. I do agree that a separate Forum thread for these programs would be a smart idea.

Two things really annoy me :

1. People who keep saying that every computer has java & dot net installed just because it is on their & their friends computers.
2. Software lists that do not say that java or dot net is required to install & run a particular program. It is such a waste of time downloading a large program to find that you then need to install another 100 - 200 Mb or more of supporting OS addons.

Posted: Mon Feb 23, 2009 6:02 pm
by nickoftime
Although I don't mind a forum for these topics, I have to agree with stevegutry.

In my very humble opinion, both Java and .NET represent an excess layer that is required to execute an application program.

Although there are numerous topics about what constitutes portability, my feeling is that portability represents something that you can carry on a portable drive, is fairly small in size, has no dependencies, can be executed at will, and does not leave a trace on the PC.

In my travels, I have found just as many PCs that do not have Java and/or .NET installed than those that have it. I have seen numerous corporate PC images that do not load these applications because of the hit taken on PC performance.

I'm not saying that .NET and Java are not great tools for application development. On the contrary; both have their respective place in the development world.

In the portable freeware world, my hope is that these applications do not get blended into the already-robust application catalog. Maybe application segregation is an option; i.e. another Portable Freeware site for Java & .NET applications only.

That's my two cents... feel welcome to dive in :)



Posted: Tue Feb 24, 2009 8:16 pm
by Ameri-CAIN
Great idea ashghost. I mostly deal with machines in a windows environment, and I like you use several .NET apps in a portable (portable for me because .NET is most everywhere I am) fashion from my USB drive. I stopped even suggesting them in the forums because of the reaction that .NET apps usually get. I know they aren't portable in the most die hard sense, but some of them are very useful. I try to only use them when I can't find a better fully portable alternative, but I don't know of an outlet anywhere on the net to discuss them either. I would think the feedback that could be gained from them being talked about in a forum like this could get people to suggest better portable alternatives for these .NET/Java apps. Perhaps even get people to develop programs that meet everyone's needs, while seeing the interest such applications are gaining. But the fact that .NET integrates so well with the Windows subsystem, makes it the easiest choice for developing some applications. Somebody that wants to create a clone of Windows Cluster Administrator Console with more options would spend much less time developing a .NET app for instance, than coding and compiling a C variant. Perhaps it would be more beneficial to code it in C but a C developer might not see the need for such an app.

I wouldn't expect to see them in the portable database, but it would be nice to have a forum to discuss .NET/Java apps. In case you can't tell, I voted Yes. :lol:

Posted: Tue Feb 24, 2009 9:49 pm
by Onesimus Prime
My vote? Yes.
And this comes from somebody who only has .NET 1.1 on my system (though I do have 2.0 in a Sandbox for occasional use).

I don't think the point of this thread was whether people should install .NET, or whether such apps should be integrated into TPFC as a whole, but more whether to have a centralized (and legitimized) place for these submissions, a "clearing-house" for not-strictly-portable (by TPFC's definition) freeware, and a place in the forums that people, such as myself, who choose not to use .NET can choose to avoid :lol: (though I guess it'd still come up in searches, and maybe lead to some dashed hopes that way).

I admit, the below is also somewhat off-topic, but here are two programs that can tell you what version(s) of .NET are installed on your computer, or whatever computer you're using...
(via here)

Neither really have settings, but both write to the registry, so are not stealth:
The 1st writes to HKCU\ASoft (yep, not HKCU\software)
The 2nd writes to HKLM\software\classes\...

Re: How about "Portable Freeware Requiring .NET or Java&quo

Posted: Thu Feb 04, 2010 12:46 pm
by Kermode
ashghost wrote: I wonder how many forum members come across a .NET application that they think is amazing, but know better than to submit it here?
When I come across a .NET application I avoid it - simple ;)

Re: How about "Portable Freeware Requiring .NET or Java&quo

Posted: Sat Apr 03, 2010 12:17 pm
by webfork
Some news on this: PortableApps is actively doing work on a portable Java and associated applications:
Java Portable Apps Coming - This release of Java Portable marks the beginning of Java apps on the Platform. We have an array of Java-based portable apps in testing and will begin releasing them soon.
Based on this post by PortableApps admin, there is no plan on doing something similar for .NET.