Jump to content

[Release] eXPander


XPero

Recommended Posts

Why people is still afraid of .NET when it will be integrated with Vista and subsequent MS OSes? Will you switch to Linux or what?

i'm not afraid of .net, i'm afraid of my disk space : .net 2 eats enough space to store lots of music. and i do prefer music to ".net 2". And my comp can't run vista. and i will not buy a new hd only for .net. and so on i can find lots of good reasons to not use this and say that it's a piece of crap.

Stating that an app is a piece of junk just because it uses th .NET Framework is stupid.

Read again, XPero : i did not stated that your app is a piece of junk, i said .net is. I do not care if your app use 1 million more bytes than a batch : it will be 1 MB (or about 1 minute of music...). That's not a waste if it looks better for example (i'm using a wallpaper and a theme also... i'm not on 3.1 !)

But when it comes to have a so small app that requires so much runtimes, it's a waste (openoffice uses less space on my disk, and does many many many many many many many more...).

Moreover, it is possible to acheive the same result without these runtimes. (but not in C#, thus my comment about "junk" & .net)

Oh, and if you are not going to use it no matter if it uses .NET 1.1 or .NET 2.0, why the hell are you posting at all? Finally, your idea of splitting windows isnt bad, I will try that (at least we got something positive from your comment).

:lol: If you only want positive feedbacks, tell so in your posts. Anyway, you nearly answered yourself to your question.

i were not trying to be "destructive", i'm only saying what i think as directly as i can.

Oh, and I remind you something from my 1st post: "I know it isn't innovative, but I just wanted to put in practice my coding skills making a simple app like this..."

ok, you want to exercise, so look for the suggestions i made, and code the ones you feel able to :yes:

(i have one more suggestion : make a rounded progressbar for each file on the outer, and another for the whole fileset in the inner, both clockwise or one clockwise and one counterclockwise or you can even blend them. rounded progressbars would be really innovative, even if they existed 25 years ago in car games as speed meters)

But the whole .net is just a bunch of files sitting there if needed. I don't see any downside...if it is needed for at least one of your favorite programs.

Btw there is the Framework Lite on my site, it works for many.

They started it with MFC runtimes in c++, it's all the same principle, just smaller and less functions, or in developer terms more redundant work.

yes, and when the "developer" is feeded with so many ready-to-use functions, he tends to become no more than a script kiddie. I don't know (nor care) what computer you have nuhi, but when i installed .net 2 to try the latests nlites, i saw that the UI was flickering. I have the same problem with 1.1 and olders nlites, but it's just "a flash" of less than a second. With .net 2 it lasts far more. There is not enough controls on your forms to create a ressource hog on a 1GHz+ CPU (hey, ms office, or openoffice has at least 10x more controls, and no display problems -- they load faster, even without their "quickstarters"). Only explanation is there is too many overrides/hooks on the refresh/painting functions (mainly, but also on other standard windows functions to get the "managed" code to work). And guess what ? you didn't even wrote *one* of those painting functions, since you relie on "the bunch of files sitting there if needed" (which is the normal coding way in such an high-level language -- the matter is the lack of compiler : only precompilation is made, and everything is left at the intermediate IL stage, like 20-years-old QBASIC in MS-DOS).

i don't need an app that has an incorrect display everytime i click somewhere. and i never saw a .net app that displays perfectly, when i saw many non-.net doing the same tasks with no display problems.

i'm too tired to discuss more about .net flaws (late night here), but i'll end up with that : you said there is a ".net optimisation service". Do you know what this service is about ? Do you know of any other "framework" that need a similar service ? You're thinking of Java ? yes ? Good answer (else, i'm interested). Guess what ? Java is portable between OSes, .net is not. And Java win32 runtimes are half the size of .net. Only this would be enough for me to say "piece of junk" about .net.

footnote : all i say here is my *general* point of view, there is no personal offense intended.

++

Link to comment
Share on other sites


A couple requests:

Add the pssibility to create cab files with multiple files in them. People can just drag the files/folders over to the box and drop them in to create one .cab file. Or when you add shell support people can highlight and right click to create .cab file.

Also... I recommend you add 7z.exe as well. It can expand .cab .rar .zip .7z .tar ... and more all with the same command line. :thumbup

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello

Thanks, nice tool, but "Jcarle" had done the same !

So

- Can you integrate ModifyPe in th same folder ?

- Do you want help to translate it ?

- Will the program be under GPL licence ?

- Do you plan to make an installation program (Like installshield ?)

++

Edited by KRYOGENIUS
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello

Thanks, nice tool, but "Jcarle" had done the same !

So

- Can you integrate ModifyPe in th same folder ?

- Do you want help to translate it ?

- Will the program be under GPL licence ?

- Do you plan to make an installation program (Like installshield ?)

++

Thanks for comments. Your questions:

1. If I get permission, yes. But I would like eXPander to be a single .exe. We will see.

2. No need for now, thanks. It is a little tool that only a few people will use.

3. No. Why?

4. Not now. Yes, if I see the need for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

I'm rewriting eXPander and have added some of your requests. It has now a smaller GUI and I added the splitted screen for expand and makecab + modifyPE. Have a look:

preexpander2to4.png

For now, I just want eXPander to be only GUI for expand and makecab (no 7zip for example). Having said this, what features would you like to see in it? My thoughts so far:

- Shell integration (optional).

- Disable visual effects (optional).

- Create and decompress cabs (I still have to figure out a nice way to implement this).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm rewriting eXPander and have added some of your requests. It has now a smaller GUI and I added the splitted screen for expand and makecab + modifyPE. Have a look:

preexpander2to4.png

For now, I just want eXPander to be only GUI for expand and makecab (no 7zip for example). Having said this, what features would you like to see in it? My thoughts so far:

- Shell integration (optional).

- Disable visual effects (optional).

- Create and decompress cabs (I still have to figure out a nice way to implement this).

SWEEEEETTT!!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I may try it once you write it in a language that does not need .NET.

Why would you need .NET for such a simple program anyway?

Reasons:

1) I have basic C++ programming skills, so I am not able to develop this in C++.

2) Why coding for weeks when you can do it in a couple of days?

3) Programming in .NET is fun :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I stopped being so picky with .NET. I just installed 2.0 and now I don't have to worry about whether nLite or something else will load up properly. It may take 50MBs or so, but I have 320 GBs, so my mind has let go of it. More important things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I stopped being so picky with .NET. I just installed 2.0 and now I don't have to worry about whether nLite or something else will load up properly. It may take 50MBs or so, but I have 320 GBs, so my mind has let go of it. More important things.

Thank you! Why do people care about this so much? Programming in .NET is much easier than in MFC/C++. the only people who would really care about this that much are people who have 4GB hard drives, but then again, they shouldn't be running XP in that case.

ANYWAYS - Good work XPero. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

very neat,

if you want to code nice guis, switch to delphi (making your proggy 28 times more efficient and faster) or to VC++/MFC, this proggy eats 28mb from start and loads couple of second, like rest of .net crap.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...