Scott Hanselman

Hidden Gems in Visual Studio 11 Beta - .NET Portable Class Libraries

April 5, '12 Comments [28] Posted in Learning .NET
Sponsored By

.NET Portable SubsetI'm realizing there's a number of subtle but important new things in the next version of VS that streamline some previously difficult tasks. For example, there's the .NET Framework, but .NET is also in Silverlight, the Windows Phone, the Xbox, etc.

If you create a regular Class Library it has a single Target Framework. However, if you are doing a multi-platform application and you want to maximize your code reuse, you can run into trouble as you may not have all libraries available on the smaller platforms.

Thus, Portable Class Libraries were created. You can get Portable Class Libraries via an extension on Visual Studio 2010 or they are built into Visual Studio 11 Beta.

These Portable Class Libraries (PCLs) will generate a managed assembly that can be referenced by Windows Phone 7, Silverlight, the Microsoft .NET Framework and Xbox 360 platforms. This really helps to maximize reuse of code and reduce the number of projects in multi-targeted application solutions.

I talked about multi-targeting a little in the .NET Versioning and Multi-Targeting - .NET 4.5 is an in-place upgrade to .NET 4.0 post. Visual Studio is smart enough to tell you before compilation what APIs are available. The compiler knows and Intellisense knows. The Reference Assemblies down in C:\Program Files (x86)\Reference Assemblies\Microsoft\Framework\ tell you a lot.

Reference Assemblies include .NET Portable Assemblies

If you create a new Portable Class Library, right click on it and hit Properties. You can target specific frameworks and the build system and Intellisense will adjust. Some libraries are on some device. For example, XML Serialization isn't on the Xbox 360, but WCF is on the Windows Phone.

Select the Frameworks you want

Bill Kratochvil has an article in MSDN Magazine that includes the source for a project that targets Windows Phone 7, Silverlight and WPF with shared libraries. David Kean has an article this month in MSDN Mag on how to Create a Continuous Client Using Portable Class Libraries.

Remember that Portable Class Libraries are constrained by design. You're targeting the lowest common denominator to maximize what you can use between projects. The MSDN article on Portable Class Libraries has a table that show what's available on each platform. You can do MVVM work across Windows, Metro style aopps, Silverlight and Windows Phone, for example.

Here's some good advice that David Kean sent me:

One thing [about] using portable [is that it] doesn’t mean you can’t use platform specific features, you just need to spend a little more time thinking about your dependencies. For example, instead of having a low level class that handles your persistence layer using the File APIs (which aren’t usable/available on Phone, Silverlight, etc), have it instead take work on an abstraction such as a stream, which these gets passed that from the platform specific project. Or have it call through an platform adapter (called out in my article), or inject the abstraction using your favorite IoC container (in my case Autofac, just published a portable version)

MSDN Help also shows what works with Portable Libraries as well so you're supported when looking at Help, Intellisense, and at Build time.


The BCL Blog mentioned that they are talking to the Mono guys about this as well. It'd be great to get Mono for Android and other frameworks as appropriate in here as well. I was excited to discover that this work was happening, even though it's been over a year in the making.

For folks like my friends at Rowi who have a great Windows Phone 7 application, or MetroTwit with a great WPF app, I wonder how Portable Class Libraries might change the architecture of their applications and enable cleaner builds and reuse scenarios they haven't thought of.

About Scott

Scott Hanselman is a former professor, former Chief Architect in finance, now speaker, consultant, father, diabetic, and Microsoft employee. He is a failed stand-up comic, a cornrower, and a book author.

facebook twitter subscribe
About   Newsletter
Sponsored By
Hosting By
Dedicated Windows Server Hosting by SherWeb

What geeks need to tell our parents about shopping online safely and securely

April 4, '12 Comments [18] Posted in Musings
Sponsored By

Creative Commons "StopHerJones" on FlickrMom and Dad, it's a dangerous Internet. You like it and you use it but you don't understand it. I totally get that. I don't understand plumbing. I know that the sink drain goes into the bendy thing and then into the wall. After the pipe hits the wall, as far as I know, it's turtles all the way down. I assume the Internet feels about the same to you.

I don't want to condescend or imply that the web is a series of tubes. You're not interested in knowing all the details and I'm not a plumber, but there's a minimum amount of stuff you should know to be safe. You don't need to memorize this stuff, but it's nice to know generally where the pipes go and when to call a plumber. Or me.

Looking up web addresses

When you type in an address in your browser, your computer queries the Internet's Yellow Pages and tries to find out exactly where is. These yellow pages are called DNS (Domain Name Services). This is just like me taking your home address and getting a latitude and longitude location on a map, then going there. 

Just like it's easier to remember an address like "6 Main Street" than some numbers like latitude and longitude. It's easier to remember "" than it is to remember a number like An address is a convenience.

However, do you trust the Yellow Pages? One day a book showed up on your doorstep, you reference it and it tells you where stuff is. What if an evil-doer dropped pretend Yellow Page books on everyone's doorstep and folks who wanted to go to the store were sent somewhere evil? Hopefully at some point you'd "feel wrong" about the directions you were given and you'd question yourself.

For the most part, you're usually OK, but if you ever type an address and go somewhere that feels wrong, ask someone. There are toolbars and weird little evil bits of software (called malware or adware or spyware) that can "hijack" your browser. They deliberately give your browser incorrect directions in order to get you to go to their site.

It'd be like calling the operator and asking for directions to the Safeway Market and having the operator give you directions straight to Thriftway. You didn't know you couldn't trust the operator!

Develop your Internet Street Smarts

If I tell you to go to you should usually feel OK about that.  If someone tells you to go to you should think that smells fishy. Keep your head up and protect your neck.

See the picture below? It looks like a link to and I'm about to click on it, but see the down at the bottom there's a little window that shows a different website. The blue link is under evil guy's control and can say anything, but the one at the bottom is a hint from your browser that something is fishy.

Totally Not

The browser you use might show this in a different way, but the idea is the same. If someone gives you a link that smells fishy, use your judgment. Develop a healthy - but not paralyzing - suspicion. Everyone in the world isn't out to get you, but pickpockets do exist.

Totally Not

Here's some hints on what to look for. Try to think about not as a scary computer thing but rather use the common sense you've developed in the real world. When you go to Macy's to shop, does it look and smell and feel like Macy's? How do you know it's not a fake Macy's façade that someone put up with cardboard?

Does the address match the logo?

Take a look at this screenshot. Is this a real Abercrombie & Fitch store? The logo says it is, but that address is kind of smelly, don't you think?

Fake - Shop Abercrombie & Fitch UK Online - Discount Abercrombie and Fitch Clothing Sale

Lets say I start shopping at this fishy site anyway. When I start putting things into my shopping cart and giving a store money OR my personal information, a reputable site should change our conversation to a secure line.

Just like in spy movies we hear the lead say "Is this phone encrypted? Don't call me from an insecure line, do you want to get us all killed!?!" you want to think in the same terms.

A Private Conversation

Is your conversation with a website private? Here's the fake site on the left and the real one on the right. See how a little lock appeared? That means the conversation we're having with that site is private.

Now, please, read this part carefully, Mom and Dad. The lock says the conversation is private, but the lock doesn't say I should trust them. You can have a private conversation with a bad guy. There are bad sites with this little lock.

HTTPS (SSL) doesn't mean "I can trust this site," it means "this conversation is private." You still might be having a private conversation with Satan. - Scott Hanselman

Trust and Privacy are different things. "Do I trust this person" and "Is our conversation private?" are different questions. You want to answer yes to both questions before you give a company your credit card number.

A fake site and a real site, side by side

I can click on the lock at the website to see a bunch of techie stuff. That techie stuff is not as interesting as is the other locks and information. There's two green locks assuring me of the privacy of our interaction, but more importantly I can see I've never visited this site before.

But what if I know I have visited the site? What if I visit this site every day and now here it is saying I don't? This is a good time to look around and make sure I am where I think I am. Check the address again, just like you would in real life before you ring the doorbell.

Clicking on the SSL Lock gives more information

Compare this to Amazon, a site I do visit all the time.

Clicking on the SSL Lock gives more information

A Trusted Conversation

If you're going to do some online banking, you should expect to see that lock as soon as you get to the bank's site.

Large, reputable banks should use a special lock on their sites. See this site in three different browsers below? The address bar has turned green. This means that not only is our conversation private but that a company has checked to make sure it's really Bank of America. This means I can trust them AND our conversation is private. These are called "high assurance" or "extended validation" certificates if you want to tell your local credit union or community bank to get one.

Just like Scully and Mulder check other agent's IDs before talking to them, you should be checking the identification of websites you talk to.

EV SSL Certificates are high trust

Questions to Ask

Ask yourself these questions when you start giving away your name, address or credit card online.

  • Does the address for this website look correct?
  • Does the site look real? Have I been here before?
  • How did I get to this site? Did I use a bookmark or did I click on an email from a stranger?
  • Is there a lock in the address bar?
  • For banks or finance sites, is the address bar green? What does it say when I click on it the lock?

What can Techies do to help our parents?

Consider setting Mom and Dad up with OpenDNS. It's not only a trusted DNS Service (That's Yellow Pages, Mom, if you're still here) but OpenDNS can block inappropriate sites for the whole family no matter what browser you use.

If you (or Mom) had the Web of Trust installed, this is what you would have seen when visiting an evil site like this. I'm installing this free tool on Mom's machine today. It's a browser plugin that uses other people's experience to augment yours!

web of trust

Related Links

About Scott

Scott Hanselman is a former professor, former Chief Architect in finance, now speaker, consultant, father, diabetic, and Microsoft employee. He is a failed stand-up comic, a cornrower, and a book author.

facebook twitter subscribe
About   Newsletter
Sponsored By
Hosting By
Dedicated Windows Server Hosting by SherWeb

.NET Versioning and Multi-Targeting - .NET 4.5 is an in-place upgrade to .NET 4.0

April 2, '12 Comments [89] Posted in Learning .NET
Sponsored By

Say what you will about the past ridiculousness of .NET Framework versioning, since the confusion of .NET 3.5SP1 they've  been trying to get it right. It's not the magic of Java Version 6 Update 31 (build 1.6.0_31-b05) but it's a start. O_o

Back in July of 2011 I wrote a post on Issues with .NET and Microsoft Product Versioning that got the attention of some folks. I was most concerned about some "platform updates" to .NET 4 and the way they were named. Meetings were had and those small updates now have simpler names versions like NET 4.0.1, etc.

I'm not going to tell you it's not confusing today. I do think that things are getting better and becoming less confusing. .NET 4.5 is a step in the right direction of transparency in versioning.

The .NET Framework can version in two ways. There are "side by side installs" and there are "in place upgrades." A major version means side-by-side and a minor version means in-place.

Side-by-side means that different versions of .NET can live together on the same machine.

Diagram: .NET CLRs can live side by side

In-place upgrade means that the CLR is the same but new libraries are added as well as bug fixes and performance improvements:

Diagram: .NET 4.5 builds on top of .NET 4

There's been some concern about how .NET 4.5 is an "in-place upgrade" of .NET 4. That means .NET 4.5 is still the v4CLR and adds new libraries as well as improvements to the core CLR itself.

Rick Strahl said on his blog:

Note that this in-place replacement is very different from the side by side installs of .NET 2.0 and 3.0/3.5 which all ran on the 2.0 version of the CLR. The two 3.x versions were basically library enhancements on top of the core .NET 2.0 runtime. Both versions ran under the .NET 2.0 runtime which wasn’t changed (other than for security patches and bug fixes) for the whole 3.x cycle. The 4.5 update instead completely replaces the .NET 4.0 runtime and leaves the actual version number set at v4.0.30319.

Rick has a great post with a lot of detail and information. However, respectfully, I don't think .NET 4.5 vs. .NET 4 is as different as Rick implies. In fact .NET 3 and .NET 3.5 both upgraded the system (and CLR) in place as well.

Perhaps if 3 and 3.5 were called .NET 2.5 and .NET 2.8 it would have made more sense. The community is always concerned about breaking changes, much like we are here with .NET 4 and .NET 4.5. Unfortunately reality and marketing names haven't always matched, but going forward I think we all agree that:

  • Major Version = New CLR
  • Minor Version = Bug fixes, new libraries
  • Revision = Bug fixes, no breaking changes, small improvements

.NET 4.5 is not a radically different side-by-side CLR. A new CLR would be a theoretical .NET 5 In my opinion.

Could something break with .NET 4.5? This is why it's in beta now, so now is the time to speak up. It's possible something could break but unlikely according the .NET Blog. Here are the known .NET 4.5 breaking changes - most are pretty obscure. The kinds of breaking changes I've seen myself in the wild have been primarily when folks are relying on reflection or internal data structures. These internals aren't public contracts so they may have changed. I realize that when a change breaks YOU it feels like a situation when "100% of applications will break....mine did!" situation. It sucks, but in fact there are minimal breaking changes in .NET 4.5.

Can I get .NET 2.0, 3.5, 4 and 4.5 apps all running together on my system? Yes.

Can I develop apps with different versions with Visual Studio 11 Beta? Sure, you can multi-target all these versions and even plugin more targeting packs. I'll do a blog post later this week on Portable Libraries, a new version in .NET 4.5 that makes creating libraries for any CLR (including Xbox, Phone, Mono and others).

Screenshot of the multi-targeting dropdown in Visual Studio

Developing Safely for both .NET 4 and .NET 4.5

It's been implied on blogs that if you install .NET 4.5 on your machine that you can't safely develop for .NET 4. In Rick's post, he compares two DLLs on a .NET 4 machine and again after the .NET 4.5 in place upgrade. How can you target safely against .NET 4 if you've installed .NET 4.5? You don't have those .NET 4 DLLs anymore, right?

Actually you do. They are in C:\Program Files (x86)\Reference Assemblies\Microsoft\Framework\.NETFramework.

Reference Assemblies

Let's prove it on a machine with Visual Studio 11 Beta. I'll make a DLL and reference System.Web and make use of one of the added types in that assembly. Yes, it's a screenshot of code, but hang in there.

Using the .NET 4.5 ModelBinderDictonary Type

Now I'll change the properties of my project from .NET 4.5 to .NET 4. I won't change anything else. I'll build. Note that the type isn't there, I get a build error and I can't reference the namespace. You will know if you're using new .NET 4.5 functionality. The multi-targeting build system was designed for this and existed as far back as .NET 3.5. Those reference assemblies are there to catch this kind of thing.

Referencing .NET 4 and using a type we don't have will cause a compiler error

So while .NET 4 and .NET 4.5 don't live side by side on your system at runtime, Visual Studio knows about all the different versions of .NET and the compiler will reference different versions when you build.

If you are making a client app, like WinForms, Console, WPF, etc, this is all automatic. Your app.config contains that fact that you need .NET 4.5 and you'll even get a prompt to install it.

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
<supportedRuntime version="v4.0" sku=".NETFramework,Version=v4.5" />

So if I run my .NET 4.5 Console App on a .NET 4.0 machine now I get a nice dialog.

A dialog that pops up when running .NET 4.5 apps on .NET 4 to prompt an update

Looks like this technique doesn't work on ASP.NET (I would expect a Yellow Screen of Death)...I will talk to the team about that. I think this is a good thing and ASP.NET should respect it also.

UPDATE #2: The system will throw an error when an ASP.NET 4.5 application is deployed to an ASP.NET 4 system. The default templates on for ASP.NET 4.5 applications include the targetFramework attribute set to 4.5 like this:

<compilation debug="true" strict="false" explicit="true" targetFramework="4.5" />

This will throw a YSOD if you deploy a 4.5 to a 4 machine like this: "The 'targetFramework' attribute currently references a version that is later than the installed version of the .NET Framework."

UPDATE: If you really, really want to detect .NET 4.5 at runtime, don't check versions or build numbers. Check for the existence of the feature you want to use. For example, from this Stackoverflow question by Christian K, here's how to detect .NET 4.5 programmatically.

However, David from the CLR team (in the comments) says that this is not a good idea. He says to check if an important feature is there and use it. Don't cheat and infer .NET versions.

"The IsNet45OrHigher example is not what we'd recommend. By feature detection, we mean 'detecting the presence of a feature before you use that feature', <i>not</i> 'using the presence of a feature to determine what version of .NET you are runnning on."

public static bool IsNet45OrNewer()
// Class "ReflectionContext" exists from .NET 4.5 onwards.
return Type.GetType("System.Reflection.ReflectionContext", false) != null;

Microsoft has said the same thing about Operating System features:

Identifying the current operating system is usually not the best way to determine whether a particular operating system feature is present. This is because the operating system may have had new features added in a redistributable DLL. Rather than using GetVersionEx to determine the operating system platform or version number, test for the presence of the feature itself.

Related Posts

Sponsor: My sincere thanks to Axosoft for sponsoring this week's feed! Imagine agile project management software that is brilliantly easy to use, blazingly fast, totally customizable, and just $7 per user. With OnTime Scrum, you won't have to imagine. Get started free.

About Scott

Scott Hanselman is a former professor, former Chief Architect in finance, now speaker, consultant, father, diabetic, and Microsoft employee. He is a failed stand-up comic, a cornrower, and a book author.

facebook twitter subscribe
About   Newsletter
Sponsored By
Hosting By
Dedicated Windows Server Hosting by SherWeb

ASP.NET MVC 4, ASP.NET Web API and ASP.NET Web Pages v2 (Razor) now all open source with contributions

March 28, '12 Comments [75] Posted in ASP.NET | ASP.NET MVC | Open Source
Sponsored By

Happy Tuesday! It's indeed a happy day as I am (literally this moment) at a conference in Las Vegas and have just pressed Publish on this blog post to announce that we are open sourcing ASP.NET MVC 4, ASP.NET Web API, ASP.NET Web Pages v2 (Razor) all with contributions under the Apache 2.0 license. You can find the source on CodePlex . Be sure to read all the details on ScottGu's blog.

Ya, I bolded, underlined and italicized that last part and yes, it was gratuitous. Fight me. ;)

This is the culmination of a lot of hard work by a lot of folks in our organization. It's the very reason that I came to work at Microsoft. So, what’s happening here?

While the source for ASP.NET MVC has had source available since its inception, and converted to the MS-PL license in April of 2009, the developers didn't take contributions from the community. While we were open source we were not “open source with takebacks.”

Today we continue to push forward and now ASP.NET MVC, Web API, Web Pages will take contributions from the community. NuGet from OuterCurve also is open source, and now huge parts of ASP.NET are as well. We shipped community code in NuGet with Visual Studio 2010 and NuGet has taken community contributions. Now we will ship community code inside ASP.NET in this upcoming version of Visual Studio.

We are opening sourcing these ASP.NET components on CodePlex using Git as our repository. CodePlex now supports TFS, Subversion (via a bridge), Mercurial and now Git.

Why Open Source?

If you’ve been following our exploits, we’ve actually been shipping open source with ASP.NET and Visual Studio for quite a few years. We started shipping the jQuery open source JavaScript library back in 2008. Since then we’ve added Modernizr, Knockout, jQuery Mobile, JSON.NET, and jQuery UI. These are all shipping and available today. Betcha didn't know that.

Microsoft started using an open development style with the Windows Azure SDK last year. It’s worked and worked well, so now they’re expanding the style to include some of the popular frameworks like ASP.NET. This will let us get feedback and respond to it faster than ever.

Over the last four years at Microsoft I’ve worked closely with the community to get feedback and voices heard by the developers. However today, as we introduce more open source projects that take contributions, you can get more directly involved.

  • Find a bug? Send a unit test or fix.
  • Think our coverage isn’t sufficient? Submit a unit test.
  • Got a feature idea? Get involved more deeply with the developers and help write it.

Like every large open source project, every check-in (open source or otherwise) will be evaluated against the existing standards used by the developers. Even better, you’ll get to see our developers' checkins to the product out in the open.

It’s really important to remember that ASP.NET MVC, Razor, and Web API are fully supported Microsoft products and will still be staffed by the same developers that are building them today. The products will be backed by the same Microsoft support policy and will continue to ship with Visual Studio.  Also, to be clear, Microsoft is maintaining the same level of development resources as we always have. There’s still a roadmap and actually, there are more Microsoft developers working on ASP.NET today than ever before.

Why are you doing this?

Why shouldn't we? We like open source and you do too. Many of us come from open source backgrounds and many of us work on open source in our spare time.  We think our products are great and by moving to an open development model we think even more people will be energized, excited, and help make the products and the community even stronger.

Are you going to open source more things in ASP.NET?

Did I mention we love open source? We are going to continue to do open source in ASP.NET as we can when it makes sense.

Why isn’t ASP.NET Web Forms open sourced?

The components that are being open sourced at this time are all components that are shipped independently of the core .NET framework, which means no OS components take dependencies on them. Web Forms is a part of System.Web.dll which parts of the Windows Server platform take a dependency on. Because of this dependency this code can’t easily be replaced with newer versions expect when updates to the .NET framework or the OS ships.

What about Mono?

The Web Team digs Mono. We love that ASP.NET MVC can run on Mono and we look forward to getting contributions from the Mono community. In fact, I called my friend Miguel last week so he could be the first one to submit a pull request.

Why not on GitHub?

The Visual Studio Team has big plans for CodePlex, including adding Git support and modernizing the experience. Right now CodePlex supports TFS, Mercurial (Hg) and just added Git! As we're a partner with the Visual Studio Team we think the right thing for us to do is to support their plans to make CodePlex a thriving place for open source software again. We push them hard and they're releasing weekly now.


Here's how I look at it: Open Source == Increased Investment. ASP.NET is a part of .NET, it will still ship with Visual Studio. It's the same ASP.NET, managed by the same developers with the same support. It's ASP.NET except now you can get involved. You'll be able to see our developers' check-ins in public, offer feature ideas of your own, perhaps even become a key committer.

I'm pretty jazzed that we pulled this off at Microsoft. Still, it's just the beginning. I’m looking forward to working with you! ;)


Related Links

About Scott

Scott Hanselman is a former professor, former Chief Architect in finance, now speaker, consultant, father, diabetic, and Microsoft employee. He is a failed stand-up comic, a cornrower, and a book author.

facebook twitter subscribe
About   Newsletter
Sponsored By
Hosting By
Dedicated Windows Server Hosting by SherWeb

Turning 105 gigs of Digital Video into a one hour Wedding DVD with Windows Live Movie Maker

March 25, '12 Comments [16] Posted in Musings
Sponsored By

Here's the tale of how I took 7 hours of PAL DV tape and digital video, two CD's worth of music, 322 photos that totaled 105 gigs of digital assets and turned it into a DVD of my brother in law's wedding. The result was 66 min, 364 cuts and included music, overlays (who's that cousin?) and some nice transitions, as well as a DVD menu.

I know next to nothing about digital video and I'm sure all of you who will comment on this will say stuff like "Dude, why didn't you use Adobe Premiere/Avid/iMovie/an IPad" or whatever. You'll also say that you have created much more interesting/complex/impressive projects. Poop on you, I say. I'm feeling pretty darned proud of myself here because I just made a DVD that my family will love. ;)

OK, here's what my amateur self did.

My wife went to South Africa for a month last year to her brother's wedding. I stayed home with the kids. She returned with five hours of digital video on a bunch of PAL Digital Video Cassettes. PAL is essentially the non-US format. We use NTSC here.  PAL is 576 lines interlaced. She also brought over 300 photos across a half dozen digital cameras as well as an other two hours of 720p video shot with our little Canon S95.

Importing/Ripping Video from Tapes

First, I needed to get the PAL video off the mini-DV tapes. If you want to rip PAL DV tapes you really need a PAL DV player, then you can just hook up a Firewire (IEEE 1394) cable and import the video directly.

I decide to use Windows Movie Maker because it was free. I have a Mac around here somewhere but it's a few years old and I really wanted to edit this as fast as possible so I used my more powerful machine which is my Windows Desktop.

Back in the Windows XP days I remember this experience sucking badly. There were Firewire drivers to find, and most machines were too slow and too small to import video without dropping frames. In this case I just plugged in the cable to the camera, then to the PC and got a dialog.

Importing Digtal Video

I selected import and it even chopped up the scenes into separate files. About 60 gigs and 5 hours later I had all my PAL mini DVD tapes in an uncompressed AVI format.

That's 55 gigs of Video Files

Getting Assets Organized

Cool. I also had some CDs and music we bought I knew I wanted to use, as well as all the other AVIs from digital cameras, some DVDs of other video and all those photos. I put them each into folders like this:

Raw DVDs, Source Audio, Source Photos, Source Tapes, Source Videos

This is as far as I went for "asset management," although we did go through the video and give them descriptive filenames like this (yes, that's an actual filename):

"17A - Ceremony Begins; MC, Pastor Arthur prayer & welcome; Choir sings; Mbusi, Fatty & other girl arrive; Mbux & Groomsmen Bridesmaids Phili waiting in car Vusi4 2011-09-27 08.23.20.avi"

That file name might seem silly, but the  gamble paid off later. It's totally unambiguous. At this point we're organized and have 105 gigs of files on an external drive.

105 Gigs of Digital Assets

Editing in Windows Live Movie Maker

As I recall around the Windows XP times Windows Movie Maker wasn't very good, but I thought I'd give it a try, because it's free, sure, but also because I didn't want to do lot of multi-layered super complex editing, I just wanted to make a wedding DVD. I did want to do some reasonable interesting editing though because I had multiple camera angles on the same event. I also had the source music that was playing the background.

This meant I would/should be able to, for example, take three angles on the ring along with the music in the background and assemble a series of quick cuts in order on the same event while cleaning up the music using the original source. That was about the trickiest thing I'd want to do.

Here's an example sequence. The bride is coming in, I've got cross fades between some (indicated by the white triangle in the corner of each segment) and tight cuts between others. There's music coming in as she walks up, that fades out, the ring, then another song starts up and some photos come in.

You can mix photos and videos and get a "Ken Burns effect" automatically with pans and zooms around the stills. I mixed and matched video and photos along with audio and didn't have any trouble. I ended up with 364 scenes/cuts in the end, about 80% video and 20% photos.

The Bride coming in and the Ring

Each box there is a segment of video. You can split, trim, set starts and ends and move them around. The green lines are audio files that I brought in of the music that was playing at the time. That made the audio a lot nicer when it was just music playing and allowed for fun dance sequences like this excerpt video below. I really like the crazy color effect starting at 10 seconds in. It really works with the bridesmaids dresses.

I even published that segment above directly from within Windows Live Movie Maker with the built-in YouTube Plugin.

YouTube Plugin in Windows Live Movie Maker

I can zoom in to make the segments lengths expand which makes their size more representative of their length in seconds I can also hover over a segment and see how long it is, the filename it came from (see now why I used big filenames?) as well as it's speed, effects, etc all in a tooltip. This segment is about 8 seconds long.

Lots of information in the Windows Live Movie Maker Tooltips

The whole video ended up being 66 minutes and 35 seconds long. It rendered into a 10Mb/s5 gig HD WMV file and fit nicely on a 480p DVD.  I may do a 25Mb/s or 50Mb/s Blu-Ray also. Remember that the PAL tapes were 576i and the HD video from the digital cameras were 720p so there isn't really a reason to do a Blu-Ray, but the still photos are all >5 Megabits so they'd be improved by a 1080p treatment. I was pleasantly surprised to see 1080p as an option in Windows Live Movie Maker:

1080p is an option in Windows Live Movie Maker

Size of Videos

I was a little concerned that maybe Windows Live Movie Maker (WLM) couldn't do large videos or long videos or complex videos. With 105 gigs over 5 hours turning into an hour of video I figured I'd be taking a chance. Turned out it worked fine. I kept all the videos in their folders and the WLM file is just pointers to all the things I wanted done. The final video editing file from WLM was about 500k. It looks like an XML file with a bunch of time codes.

NOTE: I did have one technical issue where I was getting all black video previews in Windows Live Movie Maker. It turned out to be an NVidia Display Driver issue. Mine was old, and when I upgraded to the latest drivers I was all set.

It took two sessions of four hours each to edit the video and about an hour to render. I rendered into a large WMV file that was about 5 gigs. I did have three 'hang' crashes in Windows Live Movie Maker over the 8 hours, although I'd been saving every few minutes the whole time. The hangs seemed to be related to me moving audio around too fast then right clicking immediately, but I need to check on that.

Then I ran Windows DVD Maker and dragged the final file in. It automatically created scenes and a DVD menu. The opening title also includes a music background and the menu moves (it's not static) which is nice.

Windows DVD Maker includes a lot of options

One of my other obscure requirements was that I needed to be able to make both NTSC and PAL versions of the DVD. I didn't see any options for this in Windows Live Movie Maker, but there are options in Windows DVD Maker. I was able to burn two master DVDs, one PAL and one NTSC. I'll then make copies and send 20 of these home to South Africa knowing they will play in their DVD player.

PAL and NTSC in Windows DVD Maker


The couple of crashes were irritating but I crash Adobe Premiere a lot too. Overall, I was impressed. Windows Live Movie Maker was easy to use, had hot-keys for things like Split that sped me up once I got a rhythm going and handled a VERY large amount of high quality video without any issues. I'll use it again for family stuff, weddings and the like.

About Scott

Scott Hanselman is a former professor, former Chief Architect in finance, now speaker, consultant, father, diabetic, and Microsoft employee. He is a failed stand-up comic, a cornrower, and a book author.

facebook twitter subscribe
About   Newsletter
Sponsored By
Hosting By
Dedicated Windows Server Hosting by SherWeb

Disclaimer: The opinions expressed herein are my own personal opinions and do not represent my employer's view in any way.