The case for or against .NET (the beast) [closed]

Question

The company I work for uses C++ Builder 6. We've been developing native code since conception. Our flagship product is written completely in native code.

Enters the .NET Framework with its bells and whistles. I fall, hook, line and sinker. I convince management that .NET should absolutely be our new framework for all new software development and that we should start migrating our existing codeline ASAP. With all the benefits it doesn't take much convincing. They accept my proposal as usual.

At this point I start developing my very first .NET application. It's all going as planned. The project is only one component of our product. And so I get to the point of creating an installer for this new component. As a company we pride ourselves in making things for the user as easy as possible. Even Microsoft with thousands of developers don't create installers like we do. When you install Microsoft CRM for instance, you will only get a list of failures and prerequisites that needs installing before you can continue. Not us. Never. If you need something, we will install it for you.

This makes our installations feel so easy. .NET Framework not installed? No problem! We'll do it for you. Need SQL Native client? Fine!

The issue is this, now that one single component of our solution is written in .NET, it complicates the installation process incredibly. Before I can even get to installing our product, I need to do the following:

• Detect whether the prerequisite is installed

• Install it if it isn't

• Verify that it was installed successfully

• Next prerequisite

To install .NET Framework, I need the Windows Installer 4.5 first. But there are different versions for the different OSes, so I add OS detection and launch the correct EXE. Oh, .NET framework is already packaged with 2k8 and the installer exe cannot run on it, you have to run OCSetup.exe with parameters to install it.

And so it carries on. Then SQL Express 2005 needs to be installed. The dependencies increase once again.

I argue with management that even Microsoft don't make it this easy for the user. Their response is that there is no reason for us to not be better than them in this way. I can't argue with that except that I feel that there are very good reasons they've gone with their approach.

Suddenly, our installer is massive. All the prerequisites for .NET, not even talking about 64 bit support which has a whole separate range of EXEs to install. So now it gets to the point where we want users to be able to download a "quick" evaluation. What a joke. You need to download 500MB to get a 30MB application running. The majority of the installation package is prerequisites.

Management feels that we have too many dependencies/prerequisites. I understand completely. They suggest we move away from the .NET framework, back into native land where things were still "easy" in terms of installation. This is where the one part of me wants to stand up for .NET explaining the benefits in the big picture, the improved development experience, easier maintenance and overall code quality. The other part of me agrees with them wholeheartedly! Developing in .NET simply requires you to install too many other prerequisites which complicates the installation.

Yes, some of the .NET advocates will claim that everything should be installed on a patched and updated operating system. This is true, but not all customers have this, and simply saying "I'm sorry, update first" just won't cut it. Remember, we pride ourselves in the overall user experience.

We are now considering writing native code again and I know we're losing in terms of development speed and all the goodies of .NET. But we are gaining in this area, be it small if you look at the big picture or not. As we have native code development skills and .NET is actually new ground for us, it even makes sense to move back.

My question is this: what is your company's view on this issue if it even is an issue at all and what will the business case look like that I propose to management assuming I want to continue migrating all our products to .NET?

Answer 1

This is the reason to why many companies have switched to web installers that download all prerequisites on the fly from your homepage. Since in most of the cases, the OS have 99% of what's needed (if they have been updated using Windows Update).

I would not put everything for x64 and x32 in the same installer. Create two installers, one for each architecture.