The latest, stable, "normal" version of Eraser, after some fixes to version 6.0.6 is version 6.0.7 released today. Also, on the Eraser web site (eraser.heidi.ie), Joel (one of the developers) has said that the "5" versions are no longer actively developed and supported.
All this to say I appreciate the work you have done to make portable applications available and I hope getting to version 6.0.7 from version 5.8.8 of Eraser won't be too difficult. I wish you the best in working with Joel and the other Eraser developers to make 6.0.7 portable, but I think it may take quite some doing as apparently there were several serious problems to resolve (some apparently reduced to "livable" by using certain user and security settings in Vista and Windows 7) to get version 6.0.7 stable in Vista and Windows 7.
I wish I could help, but I am not a coder and I do not have the technical skills to operate a debugger and reliably get you useful debugging data. I will try to make some monetary donations, though.
Thanks again!
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
The 6.x version uses the .NET framework and, thus, is not portable. Some info on why is here:
http://johnhaller.com/jh/useful_stuff/dotnet_portable_apps/
As the 6.x version won't work on most Windows XP machines in the wild (which is the majority of public machines), it can't be considered portable.
We will be keeping the 5.8.8 version up to date with new format releases, launcher updates and new installers. We have already backported the 6.x graphics to the 5.8.8 release of ours as well as adding in other custom graphics, making it much more visually appealing than the standard 5.8.8 release. We will probably continue development on the actual app if any additional bugs are found in the current release, but it is quite stable.
Sometimes, the impossible can become possible, if you're awesome!
Thanks for the reply, John. I wasn't aware of all the nuances of getting apps to be portable.
Thanks to Open Source, you are able to adapt/back-port fixes that appear in the version "6" series "around" (without having to use) dotNet.
I commend your efforts in that regard! Thanks!!!!!
Are you using the success of Windows XP as a reason or explanation that Eraser cannot be made portable? Windows XP is a wonderful piece of software that was released for retail sale on October 25, 2001. source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_XP It isn't generally available to most buyers of new PCs. The support lifecycle for the product is winding down. source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_XP#Support_lifecycle I cannot imagine many companies or government agencies who are looking forward to running their operations on an Operating System that they might not have support for, and will not be supported after April 8, 2014.
Windows XP is great! Its installation does not consume much HD space. It does not need lots of RAM to run. It is fast. To sum it up, it runs well on almost any hardware. It is able to run all the versions of .NET (including the latest release: version 4.0).
I would argue that because XP has been on the market for so long, is used by so many people in so many different areas, and is likely to have had lots of software installed on it, most XP machines that you will encounter in the wild will have some flavor of the .NET framework installed. If not, "plan B" could be to fall back to Eraser v5 product that runs on the machine that is in front of the user.
Windows Vista did not have the same success (it wasn't as wildly popular) as XP. I think Microsoft is going to correct this with Windows 7. Windows 7 is a great OS and I believe it is likely to achieve the same success as Windows XP. Both of these machines that you encounter in the wild are likely to have .NET framework installed.
I would argue that we are putting people who are using modern hardware and software at a disadvantage by not offering Eraser v6 as a portable app.
Sure, it is possible that you might encounter a machine without .NET installed on it. If that happens, it is nice to have a backup plan. Normally that involves running the old version. Please don't limit the portable apps user base by forcing us to run the old version of the software on new machines. It pains me to see the ongoing deployment of a new product hampered in such a way.
There are other portable apps developers who are moving forward on the .NET platform while keeping their product portable. I use KeePass portable every day. If you check the portable apps site, KeePass portable version 1.17 is available. If you visit their main download page -- http://keepass.info/download.html -- you will see that version 2.12 (created in .NET) is available as a portable app. They are choosing to move forward with development of a .NET portable app and I hope you do the same.
Thank you for your consideration!
Elevate Your Thinking, Elevate Your Life.
.Net applications are only "portable" as long as you have the (correct) .Net platform available (of which there are several different, sometimes incompatible versions available). I'll leave you to argue with John as to just how prevalent (or not) .Net is in the wild but why open yourself up to such a mess?
The Keepass example you cite is an even worse scenario, there is no fallback version! If you can't run 2.x, then you'll have to mess around converting your database to try to use the non .Net version (1.x branch). Personally, I'd rather just stick with 1.x (a completely separate development branch, not in any way, shape or form related to the 2.x branch) and not run the risk of not having one of my applications work.
So far I haven't found any daily computer task that I absolutely need a .Net application for. There are always other inherently portable alternatives so why bother with all that extra hassle.
Yeah, KeePass isn't a great example because there isn't a fallback. However, if the user chooses to use version 2 it will run from a thumb drive as long as .NET is installed. That is all I want Eraser to do. I guess I will have to install it to one computer, copy the application files to a thumb drive and see if it runs.
Elevate Your Thinking, Elevate Your Life.
If you only use a limited set of "known" computers (which have the right .Net installed) and there are some .Net applications which have features that the non .Net counterparts don't have and you absolutely can't live without (which may be true to some extent in the case of Keepass). Then, the choice is yours, go ahead and use the .Net version but my personal feeling is that it "pollutes" the clear waters of PortableApps.com with confusion and doubt for many "novice" users ("This application is supposed to be portable why won't it run at my local library/internet cafe? PortableApps.com STINKS!"). I use many freeware apps portably not listed here on PA.c (i.e. not in the PA.c Format) and I'm ok with that, I just personally choose to avoid .Net ones.
I agree. Portable apps should be portable! Ultimate portability means that the portable app does not rely on any framework or runtimes to be located on the end-user machine.
Elevate Your Thinking, Elevate Your Life.
For what it's worth I do try to avoid Java apps too, since in a "purist" sense I don't consider them portable either. However, Java has the advantage of being a much more ubiquitous and open platform. That, plus there are one or two great Java apps that I really like and use (mind mapping software springs to mind immediately; freemind or xmind, take your pick). And, of course, there is a legal portable Java solution too, which helps a little bit.
I think you misunderstood. What John meant was Eraser 6.x won't work on a large majority of Window XP machines, due to the .NET dependency.
Sure, you can install it, but that requires Admin privileges.