Do I Actually Need .NET Runtime?

[Dick K]

I run XP Home SP2 on a single PC connected to
the Internet via ADSL. My Application Log shows
occasional unexplained .NET Runtime error events.
A Google search reveals numerous questions about
the particular event and no useful answers, so
I won't bother repeating what is evidently a
futile question.

However I would like to ask whether, or how I
can tell whether, I actually need .NET Runtime?
As far as I can see it provides support for
distributed applications and I'm not aware that
I have any. The naive answer would be simply to
uninstall it and see if anything fails - but
I'm worried that that might stop something
vital from running.

Thanks in advance.

Dick K

 

[Badbird]

Well, that depends... Generally you can use your computer just fine without
..NET. It's the applications that will determine whether or not you 'need' to
install it.

For example, my ATI Radeon 9800 CATALYST software requires .NET to function.
Sure, I could just install the card without it and it'll still work - but I
wouldn't be able to use CATALYST and thus won't get the full benefits of the
card.

 

[Winux P]

:I run XP Home SP2 on a single PC connected to
: the Internet via ADSL. My Application Log shows
: occasional unexplained .NET Runtime error events.
: A Google search reveals numerous questions about
: the particular event and no useful answers, so
: I won't bother repeating what is evidently a
: futile question.
:
: However I would like to ask whether, or how I
: can tell whether, I actually need .NET Runtime?
: As far as I can see it provides support for
: distributed applications and I'm not aware that
: I have any. The naive answer would be simply to
: uninstall it and see if anything fails - but
: I'm worried that that might stop something
: vital from running.
:
: Thanks in advance.
:
: Dick K

No just yet, but in the not too distant future you'll most probably need it.
Unless MS has a change in stategy, at this point in time it seems to be
gaining momentum.

- Winux P

 

[frodo]

the fact that you're seeing error messages implie that the runtime is up
and running, which means you must have some app that needs it; it won't
startup w/o an app triggering it.

Do you have radeon catalyst drivers installed - they are most common
"culprit" out there today. You can install the "control panel version"
instead and eliminate the need for .NET (catalyst 5.13 has dropped the
control panel version tho...too bad)

 

[Winux P]

: the fact that you're seeing error messages implie that the runtime is up
: and running, which means you must have some app that needs it; it won't
: startup w/o an app triggering it.
:
: Do you have radeon catalyst drivers installed - they are most common
: "culprit" out there today. You can install the "control panel version"
: instead and eliminate the need for .NET (catalyst 5.13 has dropped the
: control panel version tho...too bad)

Also can't believe when it comes to something like a graphics card they'd
code the software against the .NET environment. I'd almost always go for an
..exe or .dll that would compile into the operating system to say the least.
Best stick to NVIDIA. But anyway they've done a better job the Sun has done
with Java.

- Winux P

 

[Dick K]

Do you have radeon catalyst drivers installed - they are most common
"culprit" out there today.

No, I have an NVIDIA display adaptor and NVIDIA drivers.

 

[Dick K]

Thanks to to everyone who replied. At least I
understand the issues better now. I haven't
seen any associated problems so I think I'll
write this off as another of XP's harmless
anomalies.

Dick K