>Mike,
>
>>I don't htink the size of an EXE makes any difference at all in its effeicency. And unless you can make an EXE 100+ mb, it shouldn't affect deployment or anything like that, considering the average hard drive size and internet connection.
>
>When starting up from a 10 mb network, it sure makes a difference if you're loading a 10mb or a 1 mb executable, especially when the network is heavy used. The smaller the executable the faster it starts.

Then you may think of using a minimal executable to start with, which would show only the main screen and whatever you want to have there, and then load smaller .app files for each of the modules. That way the end user wouldn't have to load the complete .exe - they would load only the parts they're really using. Another hint: make all the modules and the .exe itself read-only. Slow networks love that.

Besides, why not copy the .exe to a local file, and run it from there, having only a little loader on the net, which would check the local version against the one on the server, and update as needed?