Compiled App Size

I just updated a little app that I use to test my LAN speed.

I immediately noticed that the latest version was built using Xojo. The give away was that the updated version was 270 files and over 70MB. The previous version was a single file executable of 122kb. Needless to say I wasn’t impressed.

What this means is that while Xojo is great for larger cross platform apps, it is not the tool to use when building smaller utility apps.

So for now it goes into the trash and back to using the previous version.

they must have included lots of (third parties) plugins, most of them they don’t use at all
and that comes directly into the final app.
for example the mysql plugin takes almost 11MB…

Yes there are several plugins but that isn’t the problem (or less than 3MB of it). The bulk of it is the frameworks. It doesn’t help there are several helper console apps.

my app ( accounting, erp software ) are lenght 88.7 mbyte ( only souce )
compiled and zipped with all library :

  • windows 32 bit : 129,2 mbyte
  • windows 64 bit : 149,1 mbyte
  • linux 32 bit : 82.2 mbyte
  • linux 64 bit : 89.2 mbyte
  • Mac Os 32 bit : 63.3 mbyte
  • Mac Os 64 bit : 80.6 mbye

??? your source dimension ???

I have two <> projects (.xojo_binary_project files) who are 27MB each (not counting the associated files, icns, help rtf, etc.)

Edit (more):
Another project (that deals with XML) is 45MB, another (deals wirth JSON) is 44,8 MB and a last one (in production) wo is 42MB.

Windows icu related files are 24.9MB…(in the DLL folder)

Is deployment size that important these days? (just curiosity, please don’t take my words as an offense).


Yes: time to download, time to load, space on 128MB SSD (or lower: I have a 64GB SSD in a W10 Laptoop).

But people here (in this forum) do not care, usually.

OK… I understand. Thank you for share!

Maybe the most important thing is about the SSD constraints on W10 laptops or really slow network access for download the product.


I forgot that one, and I have a slow wifi connection !

Nota: I go to McDonald’s to download large OS updates, but with time, they filter more and more stuff (no sites with blogspot or wordpress in them, no mediafire, nor all majour sharing web sites… no ftp,…).

I really don’t think the vast majority of people care anymore. I used to fret over such things too.

Nowadays, just the app icon will often far exceed the size of the whole app from 20 years ago. No-one cares.

Long ago, in a galaxy far-far away… I was trying to convince my wife that I needed to buy a Hard Disk drive for my computer (an Atari ST)… She asked me, how big is it, and I said the size of two shoe boxes… She said… No… how much data can it hold? Oh… said I :slight_smile: It can hold 10 MEGABYTES!.. 10megabytes? you will never fill that up!

And guess what… I never did… but today 10meg is nothing… not when you can get Terabytes for less than that 40 pound 10meg drive cost me.

FileMaker apps on the Mac can reach that easily, for just the Runtime, let alone any actual data the developer inputs/creates.

I do; but then you know already that I like to go against the grain.

Then you need ICNSmini… The latest App Icon I created, which has the needed elements for macOS, was only 280k. Agreed it’s bigger than they were 20 years ago, but far better than the 2.1MB we see nowadays.

ICNSmini Plus is currently on Sale -50% ! I can really highly recommend it !

Actually it’s 100% FREE right now, but I can’t update the text on the App Store until Apple approve version 2.0 (which is 64-Bit). In the meantime you can download it from here If there’s enough demand, I’ll create a page on my site and forget about the App Store for this product.

I bought it this morning for 5,49€ :frowning:

the batch processing in-app purchase is still at 5,49€

Yes, that’s exactly what i bought this morning. And now reading that 2.0 is already finished and the App my be removed from the MAS is sad to hear. :frowning:

Just want to clarify some things about ICNSmini, and then we can get back to the main discussion.

I submitted version 2.0 to Apple earlier this week. It’s a 64-Bit & Mojave ready version of the application, and I have removed the IAP checks, so that all the functionality is unlocked at no charge (it’s 100% FREE).

It was first rejected because the receipt validation code was failing for the reviewer (works here on 10.10, 10.11 & 10.14), no biggie, I simply replaced the code I was using, with newer code.

A day later it was rejected because (by default) it creates a folder in the users temporary folder and writes the compressed files there. This is how it’s always worked. The reviewer is adamant that it needs to use a Save Dialog and allow the user to replace their files with the compressed ones, I explicitly explained that after creating batch processing applications for 20 years, this is BAD, very BAD. If something goes wrong, they’ve replaced their original files. I also offered to implement an alternative solution in a future version, but for the reviewer to allow this 64-Bit, Mojave compatible version on the store now.

The reviewer refused; I appealed and it’s been two days since I reached out to Apple. I consider this that they’re not going to override the reviewers rejection and therefore don’t need to respond to me either.

I’ve made version 2.0 of ICNSmini available from the following link. There’s even an update as a couple of people found some issues, that I’ve fixed (so check Updates in the ICNSmini menu).
If you purchased the batch-processing IAP recently (at time of writing) please request a refund from Apple, I can’t process refunds for you (Sorry), and until they approve this version, I can’t change the product information.

Today I devised a compromise solution (I will NOT do as he asks), I’ve done a code audit and have implemented it. I’ll test it over the next few days and try again. If the reviewer continues to reject it, then I shall not waste any more of my time with this product and the App Store, I’ll create a page on my site and make it available there.

I am sorry for this mess and any confusion caused by this. If you have any questions about this, then please either create a new thread or PM me.

Yeah, AppStore rejections can be very frustrating.
It all depends on who is reviewing your app.

I ones got a rejection because the app didn’t appear in the dock. I explained the app is a background service and all previous versions were approved.
The reviewer kept saying it needs to have a dock icon (which is bull).
Anyhow, I removed that version for reviewing, set the build version one step higher, resubmitted without changing anything. A few hours later it was approved.

So, yes it can be very frustrating to say the least. :confused:

No, i wont. Because i want to support further development of the product. :slight_smile:

Thank you for the clarification, @Sam Rowlands