|
most people here in CP are 1000% against any form of advertising or malware. You are not going to find much support here in trying to use this tool.
Also, I am not sure this is the forum for this post.
To err is human to really elephant it up you need a computer
|
|
|
|
|
rnbergren wrote: most people here in CP are 1000% against any form of advertising
I wouldn't agree there. There are two ways for sites to support themselves - ads or subscriptions (==paywalls). Ads like the ones that appear on CodeProject are no problem; it's the ones that are always in your face that give ads a bad name.
Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.
-- 6079 Smith W.
|
|
|
|
|
fair point. yes ads that aren't too intrusive and aren't full of malware are ok. like in magazines
To err is human to really elephant it up you need a computer
|
|
|
|
|
I'd go with a bitcoin trader.
"Before entering on an understanding, I have meditated for a long time, and have foreseen what might happen. It is not genius which reveals to me suddenly, secretly, what I have to say or to do in a circumstance unexpected by other people; it is reflection, it is meditation." - Napoleon I
|
|
|
|
|
Instead of monetizing with ads, which is evil, a security risk, and everyone will hate you, you charge a monthly subscription or a nominal fee after a trial period? any business model other than using ads for revenue.
|
|
|
|
|
I too was wondering how to monetize my (upcoming) app, while at the same time make it fully available to the users.
I do not like trials because they are time limited, which I find stressful and problematic.
In the end my plan is to have a little 7 seconds countdown on every save file operation, with a link to "how to upgrade / pay"
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, I realize ads are not a good way to monetize since most users block the ads. And Google search only shows one prominent company that provides ads service for desktop apps does not leave much confidence for me (meaning the ads market is small for desktop apps).
|
|
|
|
|
I've decided to upgrade the desktop with a new motherboard, processor, and RAM, and start fresh with a clean Win 11 install* (hence the upgrade, the current desktop isn't compatible as it doesn't have TPM).
But this time ... I want to split OS, apps, and data rather more. So I've also ordered a new SDD (480GB) to go with the existing 1TB SSD and the 1TB HDD. At the moment, OS and apps are on the SSD, data is HDD, so the idea this time is the 480 for OS only, the 1TB for apps only, and the HDD for data.
That's close to what I had last time but it became something of a mess because apps don't always "play nice" and stick data wherever the heck they want.
Anyone know if it's possible to tell Windows that "this disk is for you, and you only"?
* Not because its that great, but because it's "OK, pretty much" and it'll be forced on me at some point. So rather than a cluttered upgrade install, I'd rather kick it into the weeds and do a clean first install. I suspect my current one started life as Win 7 ... 
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony
"Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
Not as such as far as I know.
In practice, when running windows I've found that your best bet is to have a system drive large enough to store all your programs *and* local or roaming app data + misc garbage in your user folder that windows won't let you move.
Then remap Documents/Videos/Music/Pictures/Downloads to locations on your secondary drive (I usually mirror the Users directory structure from the system drive onto my D: drive.)
For me personally to be comfortable, I do not run less than 2TB on my system drive. Things are just better that way. The cost in terms of downtime and headaches to upgrade the size of a system drive cannot be justified when a 2TB NVMe stick is about $200
It's easy enough to upgrade the secondaries, even after the fact.
You're asking for trouble going any other route, in my experience. Maybe not today, but down the road, at least if you build 10 year systems.
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: Anyone know if it's possible to tell Windows that "this disk is for you, and you only"?
What about controlling it through permissions?
But I suspect %appdata% may not play nicely.
// TODO: Insert something here Top ten reasons why I'm lazy
1.
|
|
|
|
|
It my experience it doesn't.
Your only hope is possibly NTFS symbolic links, but that can run you into trouble if one of your drives goes offline.
It's not worth it. Get a bigger system drive.
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
yacCarsten wrote: What about controlling it through permissions?
Then you'll end up with failures and things will immediately stop. Windows unfortunately doesn't try Path A, then Path B if the first failed, then Path C, etc.
|
|
|
|
|
Not as you think you could do...
Found a good description here:
Can I install programs on a D drive? - Quora[^]
Q: Can programs be installed on a D drive?
Some can. Some can be partially installed on D:. Some cannot be installed on D:.
1. Programs that are totally self contained, including all their library functions that are statically linked and built in to the application. These programs do not follow a normal Windows installation. They can be copied onto any locally accessible drive space including USB pendrives, and executed directly from there. Uninstallation is simply a case of deleting the associated file(s).
2. Other programs that use a normal Windows installation may allow the main program components and data files to be installed on D:, but dynamic link libraries (DLLs) and various settings in the Windows registry will be on C:.
3. Some of these programs using Windows installation may not offer the option of where to install the programs.
Programs in group 1 can be copied or moved around freely. Programs in group 2 that allow some of their content to be in a user defined can have this content relocated, but only by uninstalling and reinstalling. Programs in group 3 generally cannot be moved even within C:.
|
|
|
|
|
My experience with Windows is install apps with their default settings - upgrades tend to break otherwise. Then you can save the data wherever you'd like, but you may have to override the save dialog defaults to do so.
|
|
|
|
|
As you told - some apps write info where they want. So even you employ all settings to block writing from outside the OS to your new SSD it will probably break several applications... And it will be Office and VS to first break...
"The only place where Success comes before Work is in the dictionary." Vidal Sassoon, 1928 - 2012
|
|
|
|
|
When you install your applications, you can choose the drive and folder instead of accepting the defaults. That being said, Visual Studio has to be on the same drive as the OS else it won't work correctly. I'm not sure if this is still the case. I usually install those seldom-used applications on my HDD.
|
|
|
|
|
I am not sure if that works.
I mean, yup you could do that by hand with all your data but when it comes to visual studio or any other MS Software i guess they only install on C.
At least that's what i tried on my system and visual studio filled up my tiny os ssd. But the games and data are all split across the other 5 disks and ssds.
Rules for the FOSW ![ ^]
MessageBox.Show(!string.IsNullOrWhiteSpace(_signature)
? "This is my signature: " + Environment.NewLine + _signature
: "404-Signature not found");
|
|
|
|
|
Paul,
If I were assigned the task of protecting your drive I would:
1.) Install Windows 11 Enterprise[^]
2.) Install all your development tools.
3.) Enable the Unified Write Filter[^] on the system partition.
This will block ALL changes to the drive, including changes made by Windows Update. In order to update the operating system or install new software you would need to enter service mode[^]. You may also need to whitelist the registry files and other locations.
Siemens has some good documentation[^] about how they are using this feature to protect their industrial products.
Non-Enterprise 'Retail' versions of Windows are governed by a different license[^] and you have agreed that updates are managed by Microsoft. This UWF feature is unavailable to the average user.
Good Luck,
-David Delaune
|
|
|
|
|
Hmm. That's probably more extreme than I wanted - this is a working development machine, after all.
Oh well ... the new SSD can be OS and "must install on C" apps, and I'll just discourage the other apps as best I can.
Only reason I wanted to do it was so it was simpler to update with a clean install from time to time. You know how messy they get after a while ... 
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony
"Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
Alright,
Then I would recommend following most of the STIG security template[^] on your new development workstation.
Some of those changes might affect your SAMBA setup, frequently test/reboot to check for breakages.
|
|
|
|
|
OriginalGriff wrote: Anyone know if it's possible to tell Windows that "this disk is for you, and you only"?
You'd need some heavy registry editing for that; and even if you do, not all installers adhere to it.
If you own a Paradox Game (Stellaris, Crusader Kings), Heroes of the Storm, or Oxygen not Included; they save their games and put the mods in the "Documents" folder, which is part of the Windows environment.
I have the OS on the SSD, since it was "static" data in my mind, hardly ever written to. Not true with all those updates. Aw, my worst mistake was not moving the "temp" folder. You'd also need to move "downloads" and the like. I'm still moving folders. The best way to make it work is using virtual machines.
Bastard Programmer from Hell 
"If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
|
|
|
|
|
>>hardly ever written to
Don't forget the bazillion log entries generated every nanosecond.
>64
If you can keep your head while those about you are losing theirs, perhaps you don't understand the situation.
|
|
|
|
|
OriginalGriff wrote: the idea this time is the 480 for OS only, the 1TB for apps only, and the HDD for data.
I think you'll end up with relatively little on your apps-only drive. Despite your best attempts, installers will continue spewing data all over your OS drive and registry. If it was possible to place all apps on a drive by itself, so you could rebuild the OS and point it to the app drive so you don't have to reinstall apps...that would be a worthy endeavor. But I don't see the point given that it's practically impossible to separate apps from the OS.
A data drive, however, makes total sense to me. I try not to save things locally on any machine, and save everything to a system across my LAN acting as a NAS.
|
|
|
|
|
My "manually" administered and cleaned OS drive (W10) is at 194 GB; that's the best I can do with what I use. (There may be default SQL server database space that can / should be moved).
"Before entering on an understanding, I have meditated for a long time, and have foreseen what might happen. It is not genius which reveals to me suddenly, secretly, what I have to say or to do in a circumstance unexpected by other people; it is reflection, it is meditation." - Napoleon I
|
|
|
|
|
You would think, wouldn't you, that some 30 years on Microsoft might have added a feature to enforce an "Op.System-only drive" and provide intelligent defaults for applications that try to put their stuff somewhere else.
I have a hunch that in some cases it might be feasible to create a W:/ partition, install Windows on there, and just leave "legacy" applications to install on the C: per default. (Changing %AppDir% etc might help too...) My understanding is that Windows won't let you install it on an A: or B: drive because it still reserves these letters for floppy drives. Perhaps installing your "real" Windows in W: whilst also providing a C: drive would give greatest compatibility with those badly-behaved apps that one actually needs...
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
