Windows Portable Mode Fixes

(2012-04-06 23:57)Livin Wrote:  Correct me if I'm wrong but I suspect you would be able to build a non-exe packaged version directly from GIT yourself?

That said, I use xbmc in Portable mode strictly for ease of DR and maintenance. The extra few seconds to run the exe is no big deal.

My understanding is a pure portable package, zip/rar, would not work for windo see due to the dependencies. Unless you already have them installed, then it it not truly portable anyway.

That's precisely the issue and hence a possible feature request

I work fine in portable mode, the exe issue's not a huge deal for me, but I'm trying to speak on behalf of 'the consumer'. GIT? Building? - forget it... those words aren't in the vocabulary of the man in the street.

The DirectX dependency MAY be a stumbling block, but a 'zip' release for portable users would certainly be a fine improvement (don't forget, not every user had admin rights to even install an app) but a Zip release would work fine (providing DirectX was already on the machine).

Clearly a 2 step issue... step 1 = zip release, step 2 = resolve the DirectX issue

(2012-04-07 00:20)AnalogKid Wrote:  ... I'm trying to speak on behalf of 'the consumer'. GIT? Building? - forget it... those words aren't in the vocabulary of the man in the street.

The DirectX dependency MAY be a stumbling block, but a 'zip' release for portable users would certainly be a fine improvement (don't forget, not every user had admin rights to even install an app) but a Zip release would work fine (providing DirectX was already on the machine).

Clearly a 2 step issue... step 1 = zip release, step 2 = resolve the DirectX issue

I'm pretty confused... the average "consumer" will not be using portable mode, or care about a portable install. The number of users of true portable apps is less than 1% of the overall app user base.

And, the big one - to quote JMarshall... "The directx runtimes just plain don't work in the case of not being fully installed. "

(2012-04-08 08:13)Livin Wrote:  

(2012-04-07 00:20)AnalogKid Wrote:  ... I'm trying to speak on behalf of 'the consumer'. GIT? Building? - forget it... those words aren't in the vocabulary of the man in the street.

The DirectX dependency MAY be a stumbling block, but a 'zip' release for portable users would certainly be a fine improvement (don't forget, not every user had admin rights to even install an app) but a Zip release would work fine (providing DirectX was already on the machine).

Clearly a 2 step issue... step 1 = zip release, step 2 = resolve the DirectX issue

I'm pretty confused... the average "consumer" will not be using portable mode, or care about a portable install. The number of users of true portable apps is less than 1% of the overall app user base.

And, the big one - to quote JMarshall... "The directx runtimes just plain don't work in the case of not being fully installed. "

XBMC offers 'live' version running from CD catering to an audience that simply doesn't want to install / can't install / wants to try. Should that be tossed as a bad idea too?
Most users don't KNOW what sort of install they have, they just go with the defaults. But quite a few of them wonder how to migrate to another PC, or install their set up on multiple PC's...
It's not about consumers wanting portable apps, it's about them wanting the benefits that portable apps offers them (they just don't know the technology behind it).

Totally agree that the Direct X issue IS a problem. But XBMC WILL run on a virgin Vista or Win 7 installation providing the relevant DLLs are side by side with the app... the issue's how to get them their without breaking any distribution agreement.

OR

You just say "XBMC's for geeks, portable mode isn't really portable, and that's that".

(2012-04-17 14:44)AnalogKid Wrote:  Totally agree that the Direct X issue IS a problem. But XBMC WILL run on a virgin Vista or Win 7 installation providing the relevant DLLs are side by side with the app... the issue's how to get them their without breaking any distribution agreement.

You say here XBMC will run on Windows without an install... if that is the case, then I suggest you make a formal feature request. JMarshall has said it will not run, so you should take it up with him directly.

(2012-04-17 14:44)AnalogKid Wrote:  You just say "XBMC's for geeks, portable mode isn't really portable, and that's that".

Nope, not at all... you misunderstand what portable mode is, and its intent. And, non-geeks seem to have no problem running XBMC as designed... there are thousands that do.

If this is something you want, you have 2 choices that might get it done...
1) put in a TRAC feature request and hope/ask/beg/convince a dev to try to do it.
2) find a way to do it yourself and publish.

IMO we have exhausted this convo... I'm out.

I agree a fully portable install would be handy.

(2012-04-08 08:13)Livin Wrote:  The number of users of true portable apps is less than 1% of the overall app user base.

Based on what?

I am i guess one of the average users, and i am looking for this. Here is why:

I travel. My media is on a server on the internet. And i really think this internet thing is going to become very popular one day.
It would be great to have a small XBMC on a USB stick to take with me. With small i mean without an additional OS. Because XBMC won't be the only thing i have with me. And everyone i know uses Windows... Yes, all of them...

Also having the userdata/appdata on the USB stick. Instead of having my log with login data on every pc i use it on.
The size of my userdata is not very big as it holds, for example: only episodes of shows i follow that i have not yet seen. It's not storage but more something that changes content frequently. My whole Users\***\AppData\Roaming folder is 650Mb atm.
So the library is easy but not the most important. What is, is instant access to direct overview and streaming of my files

Atm, I use an old 10.0 live. And i have to add my source every time i use it. Build my small library. And delete it when i am done, together with the log.

I would totally understand that there is only a 1% of the userbase that uses it. Because it is almost too much work. As it is easier to just log in on http, browse to file and just dl the 300Mb file.
But it could be a no re-login, instant library, with awesome player, on the go. Maybe even get it as Windows autoplay option?

But yeah, Git is a few steps too far for me.

@MassIV: The existing portable option (start the exe with -p) is EXACTLY for the case you propose.

Nothing should be written to the host system if you have it all sitting on your USB stick.

(2012-05-10 11:15)jmarshall Wrote:  @MassIV: The existing portable option (start the exe with -p) is EXACTLY for the case you propose.

Nothing should be written to the host system if you have it all sitting on your USB stick.

Are there any dependencies that need to be installed on the host system for this to work?

I ask because I tried using this portable option (exe with -p) on a USB stick not long ago for a friend. While it worked flawlessly with the computer that I used to set it up, it simply refused to work on my friend's laptop (i.e. would not launch). I wish I'd noted down the Windows error messages that popped up - sorry I don't have more details to give - but I think when I Googled one of them it said that the missing component related to the MS .NET framework, so I made sure that was up-to-date. Still no dice. Didn't really no where to turn after that

DirectX + the MS runtimes for VS2010. Nothing to do with .NET.