Hi,
i am the developer of the Device Remover and beside that i must confess to be an avid user and recommender for the PortableApps. This is my very first post here and i want to seize the opportunity first to thank the community, supporters and all the people who make this happen. Thanks to all who participate in this great project!
Over the years the PA have turn into a essential package for me and i do always have an up to date installation stored on my usb pen drives. The PA's are a very mature and complete collection to me, but beside them i always carry a fresh build of my Device Remover wich is a advanced device manager and extensible general system maintenance tool. The reason why i announce my software here is, that it could be possibly something that also others could use and find handy on their daily work. Its pure freeware for commercial and non-commercial usage, no ads or anything like that. Pure and clean binary code! It possibly could be very useful to anybody out there working with devices and hardware on a daily basis and are missing a tool like Device Remover wich offers unique and powerful features, like e.g. mass/bulk device removal, in-depth system analysis, drivers/binaries backup, advanced system information, lots of problem solving features, etc. I personally was missing so many things on the original Windows Device Manager, so i decided to develop a "more complete" one and share it with others.
The application comes with a installer or as a standalone executable and all files are fully portable (this is why it could be interesting for many people here!) and runs on any Windows Version starting from Windows 2000 up to the latest Windows 8. It fully supports 32 and 64 bit operating system versions. The only prerequisite it has, is the .NET 2.0 (or greater) runtime, but this shouldnt be a problem, because its already an integral part of any system starting from XP. It also can be installed on any old Windows 2000 system if needed. The application is mainly written for developers, it-professionals and power users. It comes with a very basic help file to give you a first sight at its features but the rest is up to the user. The application itself should be pretty self-explanatory to advanced users.
There are many reviews out there but if someone is interested in it, he/she should feel free to give it a try:
http://www.pro-it-education.de/software/deviceremover/
If one wants to see the software in action he/she can have a look at some screenshots here first (the thumbnail needs a few seconds to load):
http://www.pro-it-education.de/software/deviceremover/screenshots.php
Feedback is always welcome! Have fun!
best
Kerem
Visit the Community page
Join our forums
Subscribe to our email newsletter
Subscribe with RSS
Follow us on Facebook
Follow us on LinkedIn
Follow us on Twitter
Follow us on Mastodon
Follow us on BlueSky
Can you please explain your definition of "portable" ??
Yes, it might not be fully qualified by the definition here because it does use a version of .NET but that doesn't worry a lot of people.
Other than that, I have read elsewhere that an older version of the software writes to the registry and also leaves a log file in a subfolder of %APPDATA% which doesn't meet the definition here.
Does the software still do that? Or is your definition of "portable" only limited to running from a USB drive without installation?
neutron1132 (at) usa (dot) com
Hi,
>Can you please explain your definition of "portable" ??
Sure, thats simple (on this application): The application can run from anywhere and everywhere and does not need to be installed statically on some machine. You can install it if you like or just run it from some place on your machine. The installer is just a convenient way to be able to uninstall the application or place it in a standard way in your operating systems environment. A good example and reason here to use a known location with an installer is the control panel feature: Because you can integrate the application into the Windows Control Panel, it is recommended to install it, to make sure the binary location doesnt break by moving the applications executable to another location. By the way, the control panel feature is optional and disabled by default, so you dont have to worry about it at first.
>Or is your definition of "portable" only limited to running from
>a USB drive without installation?
You can put the application on a external drive, usb pen, sd card or whatever can store data. Then you just click it and it serves its purpose. Portable means also that it offers the same functionality on any machine running from Windows 2000 to the latest Windows 8, no matter if its 32 or 64 bit. The only exceptions are operating system specific functions, but this is valid for any software, especially for those who interact very closely with the operating system and hardware. It was a lot of work to accomplish that and to implement a straightforward design and usability on a very broad product range starting from W2K to Win8. Another personal need for me in terms of portability was to make the application at runtime updatable. This means that one can update the application with a few clicks when there is a new version available online. The applictation should not depend on any additional runtimes like VC++ or other libraries.
>Yes, it might not be fully qualified by the definition here
>because it does use a version of .NET but that doesn't worry a
>lot of people.
The availability of .NET isnt an issue anymore today starting from Windows XP (and WinXP is "officially" depreciated but i still support it and even Windows 2000!), because its considered a part of the operating system and is available by default. Only Windows 2000 needs to install the .NET runtime to make the application work and this is done in a few seconds. The .NET runtime is the foundation of endless applications all over the world and can be considered VERY essential. Many things wont even work in Windows if it was missing starting on Windows Vista. If runtime dependency is a drawback and does mark a application as unportable, then lots of applications can be marked as not portable. Nearly any application either depends on different flavors of the VC++ runtime or another runtime e.g. VB-Runtime, Java, GTK, etc. on Windows. The same is for any other operating system platforms like Linux and derivates who make extensive usage of modules and dynamic link mechanism of binary code.
>Other than that, I have read elsewhere that an older version of
>the software writes to the registry and also leaves a log file
>in a subfolder of %APPDATA% which doesn't meet the definition
>here.
Yes, this was in the very early design and it was a design flaw in terms of portability, but this has been eliminated very early and quickly. There isnt any data anymore stored in that location. The application stores all the data it has to save in its own (sub-)folders as many other portable designed apps do.
>Does the software still do that?
No
best
K.
From what I can see, that meets the definition of "portable" used here. That's great.
There is one step you can take that will enhance your standing. If a version of your software installed itself in the pattern of subdirectories that are used here as a standard, the software could be integrated here (except for .NET).
There is talk of accepting .NET applications into a separate category. Although I'm not any kind of official here, I believe that it is just a matter of time.
Thanks for the info! I'll give it a spin.
neutron1132 (at) usa (dot) com
Hi,
>From what I can see, that meets the definition of "portable"
>used here. That's great.
Nice, thank you.
>There is one step you can take that will enhance your standing. If
>a version of your software installed itself in the pattern of
>subdirectories that are used here as a standard, the software
>could be integrated here (except for .NET).
I think the directory structure layout is perfectly fine, at least for the application. It has proven that it is the best layout for the application and makes all data stored appropriate and i dont think that would be an issue after looking at some portable apps and the way they store data. Dot NET does not to be integrated somewhere, there is no need for if you look at the evolvement in the last years. Its integral part (even installed with windows update, if it isnt installed already) of any windows staring from WinXP. Beside that, there are intelligent "bootstrappers" who will and can automate many installation steps either off- or online. Dot NET on demand installers are a very common way to distrubute the .NET Framework Runtime in case it is not installed yet. This was interesting in the early years of the .NET infrastructure, but today you really dont need to worry about it, unless you are using very special features or very new runtimes on older systems not upgraded. Dot NET is something that cant be ignored anymore. It has arrived in the middle of the software world and plays a central role as similar languages do like java!
>There is talk of accepting .NET applications into a separate
>category. Although I'm not any kind of official here, I believe
>that it is just a matter of time.
Do you have a link to the post/thread on the discussion?
best
K.
You say you are an avid user of PortableApps so you must know that the directory structure is standard. If you don't want to take some simple steps to comply, that's OK. Nothing says you have to.
So, do you want people here to know about your software so they might manually download it, manually extract it, and manually copy it into the PortableApps.com menu system, or would you want to have it integrated into the menu automatically?
neutron1132 (at) usa (dot) com
Hi,
>You say you are an avid user of PortableApps so you must know that
>the directory structure is standard.
Yes i do, i am aware of the (basic) directories layout how some portable app is integrated in some way and what it has to look like in basic, but i didnt spend any time on those "details" that make a app integratable. I just did start portable apps, select the application i wanted to use and use it, like many others or most of the people do out there. This makes me the avid user: Its simply a great "bundle" of tools with a fast access interface and you can carry all on a single usb storage without the need to install it on the machine you currently work on. From the point of view of an developer, there are many other aspects to be considered. But thats another topic. I did not investigate a lot yet in how exactly a application must be packed or build or whatever changed (as written in the development section here) to comply to the PortableApps.com Format Specification. As said, i did use the apps comming with the package, but i did not had a deeper look in how something has to be build to be integrate into the portable apps.
>If you don't want to take some
>simple steps to comply, that's OK.
>Nothing says you have to.
This depends on how the people who are using the application or want to use it will rate it and if there are serious requests (maybe from some PortableApps decision makers) for possibly integrating the application into the portable apps package. The Device Remover application passes through a complex and nested multi step build process before it will be generated and distributed on the main online server. The background processes should or should not be adjusted or even there must be new tools written for the automatic package generation/processing. It all depends on what comes in future and if there are serious requests.
>So, do you want people here to know about your software so they
>might manually download it, manually extract it, and manually >copy it into the PortableApps.com menu system,
I just wanted people to know, that if they work a lot with hardware and drivers on a daily basis like i do, maybe developers, administrators or whatever, there is some tool that is far beyond the standard Windows Device Manager which is most of the time a true pita or even totally useless for solving basic hardware problems. Thats all. I just wanted to share the application with others like i do with either knowledge or code. The initial intention to write here came to my mind while i was following the usage pattern of many people and reviews all over the world. I personally carry a fresh build (like i wrote before) on my usb pen and start it easily from there and many other users and colleagues are doing the same. They dont install it on the target system, though there is a great installer, instead they just copy it on the pen and put the pen into the next free usb port and start working from there. Years ago someone asked me something like "is that software portable? can i run in from a usb pen?" and i said "i am not sure, i didnt made any further tests on it yet, but afaik most of its features work perfectly fine from a mobile device". It became pretty obvious that many people used it or wanted to use it from a mobile storage to have it within reach at will as you can read on online reviews or other communites where users talk about it. The fact became clear that nearly anybody using it, was using it from some "mobile" storage device and a few days ago, i wanted to install a fresh packgage of the portable apps on a new pendrive and then i said to myself "ok, maybe someone here can use it too" and then i started with my first post. As an example some guy wrote that it has to be an must have tool in his PortableApps Dropbox (its german, go for google translater if you do not understand german):
https://www.kolja-engelmann.de/blog/2012/11/device-remover-mehrere-gerat...
Or here mentioned it as portable:
http://www.ghacks.net/2009/03/14/powerful-device-manager-device-remover/
http://www.techyard.net/remove-unused-or-unidentified-devices-in-windows...
...and some others and different languages.
>or would you want to have it integrated into the menu automatically?
If there are some serious request for this, then i will think of it for sure and then i will have a closer look on how this can be done to make it as easy as possible for the users either to download it with the portable apps or however it has to be done. I dont know yet whether its easy or not to integrate it into portable apps. I havent checked yet, but for now, everybody is free to use it the way he/she wants to use it
best
K.
Just trying to be helpful.
You can gauge general interest by the numbers of people who are participating in this discussion.
neutron1132 (at) usa (dot) com
Hi,
>Just trying to be helpful.
Its perfectly fine.
>You can gauge general interest by the numbers of people who are
>participating in this discussion.
We will see.
best
K.
Please don't take any of this in a negative light, I am just informing you of the current forum rules and the way we do things, and hopefully answering a couple of questions you may have regarding PortableApps in conjunction with your app.
If you want to get your app into PortableApps.com format that is fine. We can help you with the process if you wish to build it yourself, or myself or another developer can do it for you if that is what you prefer. Otherwise we do not accept promotional posts of apps that are not in (and are not trying to be in) PortableApps.com format.
Putting an app into PortableApps.com format generally does not require anything special to be done to the base app itself. If it requires admin permissions without a real need for it or if it requires a service to run we do not consider it acceptable as a PortableApp. If it requires strangely hard-coded paths/install locations, or anything else that makes true portability an issue these things can hopefully be fixed collaboratively between PortableApps and yourself. Otherwise it should be as simple as copying your app into our app template, filling out a few entries, setting up the correct icons and then building the Launcher and Installer.
As previously stated by J Neutron, .NET apps are not being accepted for official release but this will change in the future. Providing a PortableApps compliant package gives your users another way to use your app and will potentially open your app to a new audience, even just by posting a beta test of the app while it is not yet acceptable for official due to the .NET requirement.
If you have any further questions that an admin or developer can hopefully answer please just ask. We will gladly help you get your app into PortableApps.com format.
Hi,
>Please don't take any of this in a negative light, I am just
>informing you of the current forum rules and the way we do things,
>and hopefully answering a couple of questions you may have
>regarding PortableApps in conjunction with your app.
Dont worry, i wont take any advices as any negative light and thank you for your effort (and J Neutron for sure). Communication and conversation is always important.
>If you want to get your app into PortableApps.com format that is
>fine. We can help you with the process if you wish to build it
>yourself, or myself or another developer can do it for you if
>that is what you prefer.
In general i do all development stuff myself, because i find it very important to know how someting works. I guess you will confirm that as an developer. If there should be anything unclear, i would first address the docs and if its still unclear the community.
>Otherwise we do not accept promotional
>posts of apps that are not in (and are not trying to be in)
>PortableApps.com format.
I will do create a package or what ever makes the application integrate into the portable apps toolbox or does make it integratable. Then i will release it (as an beta) for whom ever wants to test it and see what happens.
>Putting an app into PortableApps.com format generally does not
>require anything special to be done to the base app itself.
Good to hear.
>If it requires admin permissions without a real need for it or if
>it requires a service to run we do not consider it acceptable as a >PortableApp.
In my case it needs admin/elevated privileges due to the nature of the thing. You cant operate with devices, drivers, services and processes without a specific minimum of granted access to system level components. But i have seen a few applications on the portable apps (i even contributed and debugged at code level on some of them, one example is UltraDefrag, check credits if you want), who do have the same requirement and expect to be started as admin, respectively elevated and do use drivers and services for some of their features. Some do even leave those kernel loaded drivers in memory without removing it. In some cases this can be considered either a lack of skills, maybe bad coding practices, in some cases, especially drivers, this is a must due to architectual limitations and for safety purposes. Mostly it will be flagged as system reboot deletable and on next restart the disappear. It always depends. But all these applications do have similar needs at system level as mine does and its impossible for them to work without that level of access. So its perfetcly ok. In my case i do have strict rules on how i develop my applications: Maximum stability, clean code, appropriate cleanup, safe programming in regarding memory usage, garbage collection, resource usage, etc. Its of great value to me to leave the "place" clean and leave nothing thats not meant to stay there.
>If it requires strangely hard-coded paths/install locations, or
>anything else that makes true portability an issue these things
>can hopefully be fixed collaboratively between PortableApps and
>yourself.
No, it does not, dont worry. Thats funny: hard-coded paths/install locations....jesus
Are there really people out there who think this will work everyhere? 
>Otherwise it should be as simple as copying your app into our app
>template, filling out a few entries, setting up the correct icons and
>then building the Launcher and Installer.
If its that simple, then its a breeze. As said, i do now nothing yet about what steps it needs, but i will check out now.
>As previously stated by J Neutron, .NET apps are not being accepted for
>official release but this will change in the future.
Thats good to hear.
>Providing a PortableApps compliant package gives your users another way
>to use your app and will potentially open your app to a new audience,
>even just by posting a beta test of the app while it is not yet
>acceptable for official due to the .NET requirement.
Its ok, i hope it can be of help to others like it does to me and an unknown amount of users today. The simplest thing would be, to bundle a package and realease it and see what happens.
Thank you (and J Neutron) for your time and the information,...
best
K.
Forgive me if I'm wrong, but it looks to me like you just want info on how to get your app into an PAF package. I can help you, there. First go to the Development section of this site. Things you'll need to download are the
PortableApps.com Installer (3.0.5), the
PortableApps.com Launcher (2.2), and the
PortableApps.com Application Template 2.4 (Download)
You'll also have to read through the PortableApps.com Format Specification (3.0), and the PortableApps.com Launcher Manual. With those in hand, you should be well on your way. If you have trouble with any of it, there are people here that will help. This is a pretty friendly group here.
Good luck.
Bill G.
Frozen St. Paul, MN
land of the frozen mosquito