i have a very good feeling that this is not correct.
there is an exocad framework executable which is mostly sql and .Net files that help the program run, but even the german site for exocad lists a .7z file for partners.
and exocad is one of those companies that is business-to-business, 3rd level tech support. the entity you'd have to have purchased exocad from would be your first and second level tech support.
so when you say exocad themselves sent you an executable and switched to this since pre Matera days, i don't believe you.
it also makes zero sense that a reseller would convert the executable, but also not brand the software with their logo or colour scheme.
I hear you, have no reason to doubt what you say. Especially since this is how they did my original installation of 2.2 at the lab (zip, unpack, copy-paste, framework)
Here's the story, although we are derailing the topic a bit.
I needed to work from home for 2 weeks due to getting covid.
So I contacted my reseller for them to do an installation of exo 2.2 on my home PC. My reseller is the smart optics reseller for Greece, and their version of exocad is completely unbranded. Literally zero mention of the company in the files or UI, other that the connection to their scanner software (which is done manually).
After a full day on the phone and him remotely accessing my computer, 2.2 wouldn't run on my PC (Ryzen 5 3600, RX580 8Gb, 16Gb ram).
So the next day he contacted his support, presumably smart optics or exocad support. Didn't ask. This guy team-viewers to my PC, checks, informs me that 2.2 doesn't run on AMD processors. Then proceeds to network copy installation files (exe/msi, can't remember -not at home atm-) for both 2.3 and 2.4.
2.3 turned out to have a similar issue with Ryzen. It would sometimes crash.
Then he installed 2.4, which worked flawlessly.
Framework executable is indeed a different file, I was wrong stating the opposite.
Being a business-to-business as you say, it could be a smart optics tech that did my installation. But the software is completely unbranded.
Lastly, my 2.2 installation -that is just a unzip install- doesn't show on my installed programs, while 2.4 -being an exe file- does.
I'll have a look when I get home, I'm pretty sure I have kept the files.