We are planning to develop an application that might be deployed in a 'smart client' scenario where the EXE is downloaded over HTTP in an inter/intranet environment.
I was wondering what level of trust the Essential Suite components require; for example, can all or some of these tools be run in the internet en intranet zones with limited permissions? Are they designed & tested for these scenario's?
ADAdministrator Syncfusion Team July 8, 2002 10:02 AM
The current version of our products reqire Full Trust to work in a smart client scenario.
We are however investigating into "Smart Client" issues and determining if we can make some of our Controls work in a partially trusted environment.
We plan to have an updated Smart Client support in our next revision due shortly.
Please wait for our next release.
JCJames ClineSeptember 16, 2002 07:15 AM
In this scenario, I've run into a problem with the evaluation version of the controls. When an app is launched through http, the app takes an extremely long time to launch. I'm hoping that this is because of the fusion license process and that this is not an issue with the full version of the control. Can you tell me if this is the case? Also, since we will be deploying this app in this manner, the need for zero install on the client is paramount. Will the tools work if the assemblies are merely brought down with our app over http?
ADAdministrator Syncfusion Team September 16, 2002 12:47 PM
In our local tests, this delay appears to be related to certain controls within the library. For example, comparing a standard winforms application vs an application with extensive use of Tools XP menus and toolbars, the load time is almost identical. When the docking manager is used however, the delay which you speak of is apparent.
However, if the application was local, with a configuration file specifying the url codebase of the assemblies, the speed is the same as it would be if everything was local. This may be an option for you, although it would deviate from your "zero install" scenario.
For your last question, concerning retrieving the assemblies via http and not having to install any licensing structure, the answer is yes. Nothing is needed on the end user's machine for this, except for setting up the standard security permisions for the url in question.
JCJames ClineSeptember 17, 2002 04:17 AM
The only control that I had placed on the form was a MainFrameBarManager with two menu items. Will this issue be resolved because we cannot use these tools if this will be a problem? Also, is this a problem with the full version as well?
ADAdministrator Syncfusion Team September 17, 2002 05:15 AM
Yes, this delay happens with the bar manager as well (it uses docking code), and yes, this happens with the full release as well. I apologize for not stating this in my original reply. We are looking into this.
JCJames ClineSeptember 17, 2002 06:58 AM
Great! Well, we are impressed with the tools but we definitely need to able to load our apps over http with zero client install( minus off course the .Net Framework ).
We're eager to see a fix for this and are looking forward to using the tools.
DRDadang RachmadSeptember 20, 2002 02:00 AM
I support the idea, please inform me if it is already implemented/supported
JCJames ClineSeptember 20, 2002 08:29 AM
I have been able to see the delay reduced since purchasing the full version which suggests that period of network inactivity might have been due to the eval version. Now, I'm seeing the controls downloading and cached in the downloaded assembly cache like it's supposed to. However, when using the XPMenus, there seems to be some kind of network traffic each time an XPMenu is loaded even though the assembly that the menus live in is cached on the client. This definitely concerns me as I would expect little or no traffic once the assembly is cached on the client.
Another concern is the size and the dependency of the assemblies. In order to display a menu, the app must pull 2.4Mb of assemblies across to the client. Granted, these are cached at that point but be aware of it! A GOOD solution would be to create finer granularity for the Tools such as breaking them up into smaller logical and physical assemblies or even a multi-module assembly where the main assembly contains only a manifest and the code exists in separate module dlls and the whole group of dlls IS the logical assembly.
RSRoumen StoyanovMarch 16, 2005 11:11 AM
Have the smart client issues been resolved in the latest 3.0 release?
ADAdministrator Syncfusion Team March 22, 2005 12:07 PM
The size of our dlls hasn''t been reduced with v3.0, so the initial download delay hasn''t improved.