Poll: Would you be interested in a .NET version?

Would you like Bulk Rename Utility to offer new functionality? Post your comments here!

Would you like a .NET version?

Yes
4
50%
No
3
38%
.NET?
1
13%
 
Total votes : 8

Poll: Would you be interested in a .NET version?

Postby Admin » Wed Aug 16, 2006 1:14 pm

A quick poll. Would you be interested in a .NET version of BRU? it would require the .NET bloatware runtime libraries to be on your system, but it could be much more functional - much better screen layout, more features, etc.

Comments welcome...


Jim
Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 2343
Joined: Tue Mar 08, 2005 8:39 pm

Postby jesusduarte » Wed Aug 16, 2006 4:25 pm

I think that sometimes is good to sacrifice space for functionality. Hence i don't care if BRU turns to the bloatware highway... anyways... I have spare HDD space and RAM memory. 1gb ram and 100gb hdd

I'll be guessing... but I think most peeps have 'new' computers with enough RAM and HDD space... or if their machines are old.... that they like to upgrade their stuff.

Anyways... I like the idea of a .NET version... with added functionality.

I would say that you should start another poll and ask for system specifications; Is the targeted audience capable of handling 'that extra bloatware'? Do you get increased app performance? Is the beneffit/cost rate high? If no... i think you shouldn't change then.
jesusduarte
 
Posts: 7
Joined: Mon Aug 07, 2006 5:08 pm
Location: Mexico

Postby Admin » Wed Aug 16, 2006 4:29 pm

Many thanks for your thoughts.

My reason fro asking the question is this: I currently develop using Visual Studio 6, as the compiled objects are well supported by most versions of windows. However I am not sure if it will work on Vista.

If I do decide to go with Vista then I might have to make a decision on the future of BRU.


Jim
Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 2343
Joined: Tue Mar 08, 2005 8:39 pm

VB6 support on Vista

Postby jesusduarte » Wed Aug 16, 2006 4:49 pm

http://msdn.microsoft.com/vbrun/vistasupport.aspx

As a summary... VB6 will be supported through Vista... apps might need a little tweaking. But VB6 IDE will move out of 'extended support' on March 2008 <-- Maybe not on the next windows version... as VB6 will be too old and will not have a developer team.

"As detailed in this document, the Visual Basic 6.0 runtime will be supported for the full lifetime of Windows Vista, which is 5 years of mainstream support followed by five years of extended support."

Anyways... you-ve got to read the page.
jesusduarte
 
Posts: 7
Joined: Mon Aug 07, 2006 5:08 pm
Location: Mexico

Postby Admin » Wed Aug 16, 2006 4:51 pm

Yeah, but it's not written in VB :-)


Jim
Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 2343
Joined: Tue Mar 08, 2005 8:39 pm

Postby bjornb » Wed Aug 16, 2006 4:51 pm

I wouldn't mind if BRU was .NET based. Don't care much about lots of features. Stability/correctness more important.
As for bloat, BRU itself would not be bloated as I see it. Hasn't everybody that runs something more recent than Win98 already installed e.g. .NET 1.1 framework?
bjornb
 
Posts: 5
Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2006 7:00 am
Location: Sweden

Postby jesusduarte » Wed Aug 16, 2006 4:53 pm

Ahhh sorry man, missread your post.

Admin wrote:Yeah, but it's not written in VB :-)


Jim
jesusduarte
 
Posts: 7
Joined: Mon Aug 07, 2006 5:08 pm
Location: Mexico

Postby Admin » Wed Aug 16, 2006 4:58 pm

I've still not installed the .NET framework on my XP machine.....



Jim
Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 2343
Joined: Tue Mar 08, 2005 8:39 pm

Postby BRUFolio » Thu Aug 17, 2006 10:31 am

Jim,

We have been shipping a product that required the .net framework since Dec of 2002. No problems with any customers regarding it.

many don't even have Win XP. our product works all the way down to Win 98 SE...

and of course, our product works for win 98 1st edition users but without the extra features that require the .net framework...

.net framework is not all that much bloatware ---- most of our users are low on the computer literacy scale and have very old computers, etc...

and you will LOVE developing in the .net world,,,,,,,,,
BRUFolio
 
Posts: 45
Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2006 12:05 pm

Postby Admin » Thu Aug 17, 2006 10:38 am

I hear what you're saying. However one of the benefits of my application is that it can run standalone, with zero dependencies on DLLs - the DLLs it does use are already shipped with Windows. If I then ask people to download a 20MB file it's whole different ballgame.

I quite fancy rewriting the utility in C# though....



Jim
Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 2343
Joined: Tue Mar 08, 2005 8:39 pm

Postby BRUFolio » Thu Aug 17, 2006 10:54 am

True enough, an extra 20MB download is a small inconvenience. We ship on DVD, in fact our product ships on a set of 19 DVD discs and total about 125 GB total,,,,, so the 20MB is nothing to us,,,

however, you have the option of allowing users who already have .net framework to not have to download it, or, having them get it from M$.com instead of from your servers,,,

bandwidths are always getting wider, it will be much easier for your clients when you are finished with development than when you start it.

gotta shoot for the future star,,,,
BRUFolio
 
Posts: 45
Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2006 12:05 pm


Return to Suggestions