Flare 4 slower than Flare 3.1

[SteveS]

Don't fall into the trap of thinking if you have .Net 3.5 you don't need previous versions of the .Net frameworks.

.Net frameworks are resources used by programs and each 'version' contains unique elements - you need 'em all

Unlike some, I like the programs that use .Net. In a lot of cases you can install the programs on a USB drive and take them with you when you go. I have a series of utilities, such as password minder, a pixel ruler, a freeware screen grabber (that doesn'r require registration including with the Window's registry) and so on. It is a true 'plug and play' tech writing tool box.

[RamonS]

The key here isn't the use of .NET, but the fact that the applications don't write a bunch of crap to the registry (like Flare does for example). You can get the same result with a C++ app or a Java app...or a whole bunch of apps. A nice collection is available here: http://portableapps.com/

The problem is that the different DorNet runtimes are more or less incompatible with each other (something Microsoft touted would not happen and be a huge advantage of DotNet....just like Vista making you more productive, I see). So you need to keep all the variations of the piggish runtimes around as there might be an application that uses a particular one. Which is about the same as the VBxRun.dll issues we had since Windows 3.11.
Still, any application should strive to put the absolute bare minimum into the registry or nothing at all (which is easily done!). It saves a lot of trouble.

[Andrew]

My understanding is that every version since 2.0 was a superset of the previous version (1.x versions a different). So if you have 3.5 installed and 1.x installed, you are good. I know for a fact that I never installed .net 2.0 on my Vista box, and never had trouble with Flare, which targeted 2.0.

I've rumors, however, that the next version of .NET will once again break compatibility.

[RamonS]

You never installed DotNet 2.0 on your Vista box because Vista has 2.0 installed right out of the box.

[LTinker68]

My understanding is that every version since 2.0 was a superset of the previous version (1.x versions a different). So if you have 3.5 installed and 1.x installed, you are good.

I'm not entirely positive, but I think this is yes and no. Version 3.5 does contain the stuff from v1 and v2. However, Flare v3.1 was programmed to check for .NET 2.0, not .NET 3.5. Flare v3.1 doesn't know that .NET 3.5 contains all the stuff that's in .NET 2.0 and that it can use 3.5 if 2.0 isn't installed.

The fact that .NET 3.5 contains all the stuff in .NET 2.0 is for programmers. They can upgrade their development environments to 3.5 and can convert everything to looking in 3.5 without having both 2.0 and 3.5 being called from the same program. However, from a user standpoint, which versions of .NET you need to have installed depends on which version the program you're using was programmed to use.

(I think that's how that all works.)

[Andrew]

You never installed DotNet 2.0 on your Vista box because Vista has 2.0 installed right out of the box.

No, .Net 3.0 is included with Vista. 2.0 is not.

I'm not entirely positive, but I think this is yes and no. Version 3.5 does contain the stuff from v1 and v2. However, Flare v3.1 was programmed to check for .NET 2.0, not .NET 3.5. Flare v3.1 doesn't know that .NET 3.5 contains all the stuff that's in .NET 2.0 and that it can use 3.5 if 2.0 isn't installed.

I did a bit of digging, and it appears that later .Net versions install all of the prior versions (except for v1.x) when you install them (though they don't show up separately in Add/Remove Programs). So I think if you install the latest version, you're covered for anything post-1.x.

[LTinker68]

So I think if you install the latest version, you're covered for anything post-1.x.

So you should be able to uninstall v1 and v2.0, but you might have to reinstall v3.5, because if it saw the others then it might not have installed them. OTOH, it doesn't sound like you'll save any disk space if v3.5 installs them as part of its installation, so you might as well leave them.

[RamonS]

You never installed DotNet 2.0 on your Vista box because Vista has 2.0 installed right out of the box.

No, .Net 3.0 is included with Vista. 2.0 is not.

Not so following the DotNet 2.0 installer. Run the dotnetfx.exe for DotNet 2.0 on Vista and you get this "error" message.

[Andrew]

You never installed DotNet 2.0 on your Vista box because Vista has 2.0 installed right out of the box.

No, .Net 3.0 is included with Vista. 2.0 is not.

Not so following the DotNet 2.0 installer. Run the dotnetfx.exe for DotNet 2.0 on Vista and you get this "error" message.

...which was my original point, that 2.0 is included with 3.0, which is what ships with Vista.

[SteveS]

If there is any question about do I/ don't I you can always open the add and remove programs dialog from the control panel and make sure you have .Net 1 through 3.x

[RamonS]

Andrew is right. DotNet 3.0 is basically the same as 2.0 just with a few extra components. Why Microsoft gave the whole thing a new major release version is beyond me, but I guess they counted on gullible people like me. And Add / Remove more than often lists applications that are no longer installed, since the Microsoft installer is quite crappy and half the time doesn't clean up right. I also wonder if it would be listed in the first place since it is part of the OS. You don't see Notepad and WordPad listed either.

[Gary Niemen]

Here is something that I got from MadCap support. I am quoting so as not to paraphrase myself and potentially misquote. Hope MadCap support are okay with me quoting. I do it to help others in the same position.

"Our development team is investigating the issue. There are a few theories under investigation, but it appears that the new text rendering engine may be more resource-intensive than expected. You can, in the interim, revert to the old text rendering engine by launching Flare in Debug mode. This will make the Debug menu visible. If you open a topic, you will be able disable the GDI+ Text Renderer."

[Telemarker]

disable the GDI+ Text Renderer."

+1 for this temporary work around (Start Flare from the Run menu "C:\Program Files\MadCap Software\MadCap Flare V4\Flare.app\Flare.exe" -debug true), Flare does however seem to slow down as the day goes on... restarting (not rebooting) gets things going again.

[forfear]

Same here.

[Gary Niemen]

I ran Flare 4.0 in Debug mode and disabled the GDI / text rendering. Unfortunately, Flare 4.0 is just as slow / unresponsive as previously. This is soooo frustrating. I have several other applications running at the same time, normal stuff: Outlook, IE, SnagIt, Messenger, and some others - should this make a difference? It would seem odd that I would have to close everything else down to run Flare 4.0. No other applications demand that. Flare 3.1 is okay - so we will have to stick with that for now. Does anybody know anything more?

[LTinker68]

I wonder if it would be of any help to MadCap if those who had problems with speed and those who didn't were to send their system config info to MadCap for the developers to compare. I'm thinking about the info that appears if you go to Start > Run, type msinfo32, and press Enter. Maybe there's a particular chipset, RAM manufacturer, BIOS, or something else that Flare doesn't like and maybe the developers will see it when they compare the configurations.

Anyone think that will be useful?

[Gary Niemen]

That seems like a good idea to me. I will do that.

[LTinker68]

If they give you a case number or whatever, post it, and those that are having the same issue or those who aren't but are willing to contribute info can reference the same case number.

[i-tietz]

Our problem is slightly different - we don't have performance problems working with Flare 4, but with compiling an HTML Help.
FYI: The bug number is 23969.

[Gary Niemen]

My case is 7201.

[Telemarker]

7172 here...

[help_dude]

here's mine:
bug number 23549 - slowness problem with Flare v.4.0

[Robotman]

I'm running Vista 64 bit / Office 2007 and Flare v4 definitely sees a performance hit throughout the day. Restarting doesn't do much, rebooting does.

[GregStenhouse]

I came across a similar problem yesterday. Normally Flare 4 runs fine, however yesterday I came back from lunch and noticed my whole PC had slowed to a crawl. I used CTRL+ALT+Delete to look at the processes, and Flare had jumped from normally ~50 000K memory usage, to over 250 000K. I definitely think there are some memory leak problems with Flare under some circumstances.

Cheers
Greg

[forfear]

I am thinking the development team in La jolla are taking this quite seriously. Why? Because with this being among the most popular post on the forum, this is already warranting some sort of action looking at the history of things.

So i believe this is for the better. .

It's just a feeling