Aura Sysnative Staff, Security Analyst Staff member Joined Mar 16, 2015 Posts 8,061 Sep 2, 2015 #1 Alright so I'm considering getting back into C# a bit to developp a few tools I would use to make my life easier. Also, these tools could be used by other users and I was wondering, what is the minimum .NET Framework I should set my apps at? I was thinking .NET Framework 3.5 since starting on Windows 7, all the Windows version have it as a minimum (but it needs to be enabled), however I thought that since we are at 4.5.2 and close 4.6, I might lose some interesting features, so maybe I should set it at 4. Since I know that we have quite a few C# developpers here, I thought I would ask :)
Alright so I'm considering getting back into C# a bit to developp a few tools I would use to make my life easier. Also, these tools could be used by other users and I was wondering, what is the minimum .NET Framework I should set my apps at? I was thinking .NET Framework 3.5 since starting on Windows 7, all the Windows version have it as a minimum (but it needs to be enabled), however I thought that since we are at 4.5.2 and close 4.6, I might lose some interesting features, so maybe I should set it at 4. Since I know that we have quite a few C# developpers here, I thought I would ask :)
Tekno Venus Senior Administrator, Developer Staff member Joined Jul 21, 2012 Posts 7,207 Location UK Sep 2, 2015 #2 Depends where you'll be running your apps and who will run them. I develop with 4.5, and if you drop all the way back to 3.5 you will lose out on some very nice features. If you're just developing to run on your own system, then 4/4.5 is fine. If you need to redistribute it and run it on various different machines, try to use the lowest version you can get away with without sacrificing too much. You may need to refactor some code to do that though. Others may have a differing opinion
Depends where you'll be running your apps and who will run them. I develop with 4.5, and if you drop all the way back to 3.5 you will lose out on some very nice features. If you're just developing to run on your own system, then 4/4.5 is fine. If you need to redistribute it and run it on various different machines, try to use the lowest version you can get away with without sacrificing too much. You may need to refactor some code to do that though. Others may have a differing opinion
Aura Sysnative Staff, Security Analyst Staff member Joined Mar 16, 2015 Posts 8,061 Sep 2, 2015 #3 I intend to create small applications I would make users run on their system. I barely offer support for Windows XP and Windows Vista anymore, so I don't have to worry about going lower than 3.5. Ideally, I would aim for 4 since mostly everyone starting on Windows 7 and above will have it, if not 4.5. I could make two versions, but it would be an hassle to maintain both
I intend to create small applications I would make users run on their system. I barely offer support for Windows XP and Windows Vista anymore, so I don't have to worry about going lower than 3.5. Ideally, I would aim for 4 since mostly everyone starting on Windows 7 and above will have it, if not 4.5. I could make two versions, but it would be an hassle to maintain both
niemiro Senior Administrator, Windows Update Expert Staff member Joined Mar 2, 2012 Posts 8,772 Location District 12 Sep 2, 2015 #4 Yeah, I've right at the extreme end of the scale tending to support .net 2.0 and VC++ 2005. The cutoff for me is Windows XP - I want my apps to run on Windows Vista and above without needing anything extra. Vista lovers unite
Yeah, I've right at the extreme end of the scale tending to support .net 2.0 and VC++ 2005. The cutoff for me is Windows XP - I want my apps to run on Windows Vista and above without needing anything extra. Vista lovers unite
Aura Sysnative Staff, Security Analyst Staff member Joined Mar 16, 2015 Posts 8,061 Sep 2, 2015 #5 Vista Click to expand... Stopped reading there Jokes aside, if I ever need someone to run one of my future apps and he's under XP or Vista, I'll just put together a quick batch script and that'll do the job
Vista Click to expand... Stopped reading there Jokes aside, if I ever need someone to run one of my future apps and he's under XP or Vista, I'll just put together a quick batch script and that'll do the job
AceInfinity Emeritus, Contributor Joined Feb 21, 2012 Posts 1,728 Location Canada Sep 3, 2015 #6 If these are small applications chances are you're not going to be using a lot of the new libraries and features provided within the newer .NET frameworks so 3.5 is perfectly fine. 4.0 is released through Windows updates so I would assume that most people have at least 4.0 by now. As I said, if these are small programs, you're not going to be missing out on much. Either way, you can deploy an application so that it will download the proper framework and other requirements for them automatically as well if you choose to go that way. Personally, I wouldn't develop for anything below Windows 7 anymore.
If these are small applications chances are you're not going to be using a lot of the new libraries and features provided within the newer .NET frameworks so 3.5 is perfectly fine. 4.0 is released through Windows updates so I would assume that most people have at least 4.0 by now. As I said, if these are small programs, you're not going to be missing out on much. Either way, you can deploy an application so that it will download the proper framework and other requirements for them automatically as well if you choose to go that way. Personally, I wouldn't develop for anything below Windows 7 anymore.
Laxer Co-FounderSenior Administrator Staff member Joined Feb 20, 2012 Posts 4,002 Location Portland, OR Sep 4, 2015 #7 I develop in 4.0 mostly because none of the features in 4+ have interested me. I do use a few features in 4.0 that are not in 3.5... https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-gb/library/dd409230(VS.100).aspx
I develop in 4.0 mostly because none of the features in 4+ have interested me. I do use a few features in 4.0 that are not in 3.5... https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-gb/library/dd409230(VS.100).aspx
tom982 Emeritus Joined May 31, 2012 Posts 4,352 Location New York Sep 5, 2015 #8 I develop in 4.5, primarily so I can use the ZipFile class. My tools are used by <10 people though, all of whom are bound to have 4.5 installed, so it isn't much of a concern for me.
I develop in 4.5, primarily so I can use the ZipFile class. My tools are used by <10 people though, all of whom are bound to have 4.5 installed, so it isn't much of a concern for me.
Aura Sysnative Staff, Security Analyst Staff member Joined Mar 16, 2015 Posts 8,061 Sep 5, 2015 #9 For one of my apps then I'll have to use the 4.5 Framework then since it'll use that class
tom982 Emeritus Joined May 31, 2012 Posts 4,352 Location New York Sep 5, 2015 #10 :lol: Well that settles it.
Aura Sysnative Staff, Security Analyst Staff member Joined Mar 16, 2015 Posts 8,061 Sep 5, 2015 #11 For some other apps I might not have to use that feature so then with these I can go to a lower level like 4
For some other apps I might not have to use that feature so then with these I can go to a lower level like 4
blueelvis BSOD Kernel Dump Senior Analyst Joined Apr 14, 2014 Posts 970 Location India Sep 5, 2015 #12 tom982 said: I develop in 4.5, primarily so I can use the ZipFile class. My tools are used by <10 people though, all of whom are bound to have 4.5 installed, so it isn't much of a concern for me. Click to expand... Same here :lol:
tom982 said: I develop in 4.5, primarily so I can use the ZipFile class. My tools are used by <10 people though, all of whom are bound to have 4.5 installed, so it isn't much of a concern for me. Click to expand... Same here :lol:
Aura Sysnative Staff, Security Analyst Staff member Joined Mar 16, 2015 Posts 8,061 Sep 5, 2015 #13 Well, I could always downgrade my framework version and use SevenZipSharp https://sevenzipsharp.codeplex.com/
Well, I could always downgrade my framework version and use SevenZipSharp https://sevenzipsharp.codeplex.com/
blueelvis BSOD Kernel Dump Senior Analyst Joined Apr 14, 2014 Posts 970 Location India Sep 5, 2015 #14 Aura said: Well, I could always downgrade my framework version and use SevenZipSharp https://sevenzipsharp.codeplex.com/ Click to expand... You can do that as well. But, it is a lot easier to use the Zipfile.
Aura said: Well, I could always downgrade my framework version and use SevenZipSharp https://sevenzipsharp.codeplex.com/ Click to expand... You can do that as well. But, it is a lot easier to use the Zipfile.
Aura Sysnative Staff, Security Analyst Staff member Joined Mar 16, 2015 Posts 8,061 Sep 5, 2015 #15 Yeah I know Oh well, I just need a good kick in the butt to get into it now haha!
blueelvis BSOD Kernel Dump Senior Analyst Joined Apr 14, 2014 Posts 970 Location India Sep 5, 2015 #16 Aura said: Yeah I know Oh well, I just need a good kick in the butt to get into it now haha! Click to expand... I was trying to find the perfect meme for this moment but couldn't
Aura said: Yeah I know Oh well, I just need a good kick in the butt to get into it now haha! Click to expand... I was trying to find the perfect meme for this moment but couldn't
AceInfinity Emeritus, Contributor Joined Feb 21, 2012 Posts 1,728 Location Canada Sep 7, 2015 #17 Actually a better library if you aren't using the ZipFile class is SharpZipLib: SharpZipLib by icsharpcode
Actually a better library if you aren't using the ZipFile class is SharpZipLib: SharpZipLib by icsharpcode