.NET 4 Client Profile 的真正好处是什么？
我们刚刚升级了现有的 .NET 应用程序以针对 .NET 4.0 进行编译。我们的应用程序是安装在最终用户计算机上的 WPF 客户端应用程序，因此使用客户端配置文件似乎很自然。但是，我们必须对代码进行一些重组才能使其工作（我们的一些代码在客户端应用程序和不同的服务器应用程序之间共享，因此我们间接依赖于 System.Web）。
我的问题是，做这项工作我们能得到什么好处？
.NET 4 Client Profile 已安装在比 .NET 4 完整的计算机更多的计算机上吗？据我所知，Client Profile 是随 Windows Update 一起推出的，但我一直无法找到有关其各自安装基础的任何实际统计信息。
客户端配置文件的安装是否更快/更少错误？ 41MB 与 48MB 安装大小对我来说没有太大区别，因为我们的应用程序有大约 1GB 的多媒体资源。
客户档案还有其他我没有想到的好处吗？
感谢您的任何回复！
We have just upgraded our existing .NET application to compile against .NET 4.0. Our app is a WPF client app that gets installed on end user's machines, so it seems like a natural fit to use the Client Profile. However, we would have to do some reorganization of the code to make this work (some of our code is shared between the client app and different server apps, so we have an indirect dependency on System.Web).
My question is, what benefit would we gain from doing this work?
Is .NET 4 Client Profile already installed on more machines than .NET 4 full? I understand that Client Profile is rolled out with Windows Update, but I have been unable to find any actual statistics about their respective install bases.
Is Client Profile faster/less buggy to install? 41MB vs. 48MB install size isn't much difference for me since our app has about 1GB of multimedia resources.
Are there other benefits to Client Profile that I'm not thinking of?
Thanks for any responses!
如果你对这篇内容有疑问，欢迎到本站社区发帖提问 参与讨论，获取更多帮助，或者扫码二维码加入 Web 技术交流群。
绑定邮箱获取回复消息
由于您还没有绑定你的真实邮箱，如果其他用户或者作者回复了您的评论，将不能在第一时间通知您！
发布评论
评论（2）
客户端配置文件的主要情况是，它的安装规模较小，因此更适合互联网连接速度慢或昂贵的区域，尤其是从互联网安装时。
如果您拥有受控的客户群或人脉广泛的客户群，我怀疑消除您的依赖是否值得付出代价。另一方面，如果您想要一个可供更多用户更广泛使用的应用程序，那么可能值得针对客户配置文件。
The primary case for the client profile is that it's a smaller install and thus more broadly palatable in areas with slow or expensive internet connections, especially when installing from the internet.
If you have a controlled customer base or a well-connected customer base, I doubt it would be worth the cost to eliminate your dependency. If, on the other hand, you want an application that will be more broadly available to more users, it may be worth targeting the client profile.
首先，您问的这个问题是错误的。
如果您以客户资料为目标，则同时会在完整版和 CP 上运行。如果您以 Full 为目标，则仅在 Full 上运行。因此，即使 CP 安装在比 Full 少的机器上，它也会为更多的人工作。
但即便如此，还是有一些来自某网站用户的统计数据此处：
尽管样本量很小，因此不确定性很高，但差异相当显着。
不过，如果您确实想增加它适用的人数，那么降级到 3.5 更为重要，因为 只有大约一半的网络用户安装了 4.0（此图表可能同时计算了 Full 和 CP）。但这可能不切实际，特别是如果您有第三方 4.0 库。
Firstly, you're asking this question wrong.
If you target Client Profile, you run on both Full and CP. If you target Full, you run only on Full. So even if CP is installed on fewer machines than Full, there are more people for whom it will Just Work.
But even so, there are some statistics from the users of a certain website here:
The difference is pretty significant, though the sample size is small and so the uncertainty is high.
If you really want to increase the number of people for whom it will Just Work, though, it's much more important to downgrade to 3.5, since only about half of web users have a 4.0 install (this graph probably counts both Full and CP). But that's probably impractical, especially if you have third-party 4.0 libraries.