How many frameworks do I need?


R

RipperT

Windows update says I need .NET Framework 1.1 service pack 1, but it fails
to install and will not say why. Looking in Add/Remove Programs, I have:

Microsoft .NET Compact Framework 1.0 SP3 Developer
Microsoft .NET Compact Framework 2.0
Microsoft .NET Framework 1.1
Microsoft .NET Framework 2.0
Microsoft .NET Framework 3.0

What are these for? The last three seem cumulative. Do I need them all?

Many thanx,

Rip
 
Ad

Advertisements

P

pvdg42

RipperT said:
Windows update says I need .NET Framework 1.1 service pack 1, but it fails
to install and will not say why. Looking in Add/Remove Programs, I have:

Microsoft .NET Compact Framework 1.0 SP3 Developer
Microsoft .NET Compact Framework 2.0
Microsoft .NET Framework 1.1
Microsoft .NET Framework 2.0
Microsoft .NET Framework 3.0

What are these for? The last three seem cumulative. Do I need them all?

Many thanx,

Rip

3.0 is an add-on to 2.0, so you cannot remove 2.0.

Whether you need 1.1 depends on whether or not you are currently using an
application that needs 1.1. If you do have such an application installed,
and you cannot obtain an updated version that can use 2.0, removing 1.1 will
break the app.
 
B

Bob Lehmann

Do I need them all?
Yes. It's a marketing gizmo / stupid technology decision, forcing you to buy
a new version of Visual Studio every time something changes in the
Framework.

Bob Lehmann
 
D

Damien

Yes. It's a marketing gizmo / stupid technology decision, forcing you to buy
a new version of Visual Studio every time something changes in the
Framework.

Bob Lehmann
Yes, because even though Visual Studio 2002/2003 were released years
before 2.0 came out, they should obviously have automatically worked
out how generics work... (and for 3.0, they're providing plugins for
VS2005, even though that's the VS for 2.0...)

Damien
 
R

RobinS

Damien said:
Yes, because even though Visual Studio 2002/2003 were released years
before 2.0 came out, they should obviously have automatically worked
out how generics work... (and for 3.0, they're providing plugins for
VS2005, even though that's the VS for 2.0...)

Damien

3.0 is just 2.0 + extra stuff, so nothing changed. If they could have
gotten Orcas done in time to release early this year (or last year, when it
was originally planned), you'd be buying a new version of VS to do WPF,
WCF, and WF. The new version of VS will be out before the end of the year,
and will include 3.0 plus some more stuff (like Linq) I bet you can't do in
VS2005.

Robin S.
 
D

Damien

3.0 is just 2.0 + extra stuff, so nothing changed. If they could have
gotten Orcas done in time to release early this year (or last year, when it
was originally planned), you'd be buying a new version of VS to do WPF,
WCF, and WF. The new version of VS will be out before the end of the year,
and will include 3.0 plus some more stuff (like Linq) I bet you can't do in
VS2005.

Robin S.

So on the one hand, you claim it's just a marketing gizmo, but on the
other hand, you admit that there is new functionality in each version
of the framework (I think, for the sake of sanity, we should gloss
over 2.0/3.0, since I think we'd both agree that those two are the
same) which you'd need a new version of Visual Studio to access? Orcas
is now solidly targetted at 3.5, which is the release which will have
Linq, VB 9 and C# 3.

Damien
 
Ad

Advertisements

G

Guest

So on the one hand, you claim it's just a marketing gizmo, but on the
other hand, you admit that there is new functionality in each version
of the framework (I think, for the sake of sanity, we should gloss
over 2.0/3.0, since I think we'd both agree that those two are the
same) which you'd need a new version of Visual Studio to access? Orcas
is now solidly targetted at 3.5, which is the release which will have
Linq, VB 9 and C# 3.

Damien

I agree with you that Bob's comments are unfair, but I think Robin's point
actually agrees with your position: there will be a new version of VS soon,
but it'll include a whole host of new functionality not supported in earlier
versions of .NET. Having said that... I did see one of my colleagues playing
with some Linq the other day and it was somehow working fine in VS 2005 so
maybe a new VS won't be necessary.

The only mud that might stick here is .NET 1.0 vs .NET 1.1 where you needed
VS 2003 for the latter, yet the differences between them weren't really that
significant.


Regards,
Bart
 
R

RobinS

Bart Read said:
I agree with you that Bob's comments are unfair, but I think Robin's
point
actually agrees with your position: there will be a new version of VS
soon,
but it'll include a whole host of new functionality not supported in
earlier
versions of .NET. Having said that... I did see one of my colleagues
playing
with some Linq the other day and it was somehow working fine in VS 2005
so
maybe a new VS won't be necessary.

The only mud that might stick here is .NET 1.0 vs .NET 1.1 where you
needed
VS 2003 for the latter, yet the differences between them weren't really
that
significant.


Regards,
Bart

You're right, that was my point. I'm not bashing Microsoft, I'm going with
the (work)flow. Haha. (Sorry, it's late).

It would be great if they released an update to VS2005 that we could use
all the new functionality with, but I'd be really surprised.

I think they've thrown VS2003 out the window. Not supported on Vista, can't
use .Net 3.0 with it (which makes sense, since you can't use .Net 2.0).

Robin S.
 
D

Damien

I agree with you that Bob's comments are unfair, but I think Robin's point
actually agrees with your position: there will be a new version of VS soon,
but it'll include a whole host of new functionality not supported in earlier
versions of .NET. Having said that... I did see one of my colleagues playing
with some Linq the other day and it was somehow working fine in VS 2005 so
maybe a new VS won't be necessary.

The only mud that might stick here is .NET 1.0 vs .NET 1.1 where you needed
VS 2003 for the latter, yet the differences between them weren't really that
significant.

Regards,
Bart

I wouldn't be surprised if you could use the Linq functionality inside
VS2005, since even for .Net 3.5, they're not changing the CLR. But the
major change for 3.5 is what the compilers support, so I wouldn't
expect you to be able to use the Linq syntax (you'd have to make
direct calls into the Linq functions), nor to be able to use the new
type inference system ("var x =").

Still, I'm only dreaming at the moment. Still stuck on 1.1/VS2003
here :-(

Damien
 
C

Cowboy \(Gregory A. Beamer\)

1.0 is Visual Studio .NET 2002 (or apps you have installed that use this)
1.1 is Visual Studio .NET 2003 (same caveat)
2.0 is Visual Studio .NET 2005 (last full framework)

3.0 are incremental additions to Framework 2.0 (not a full framework)

Compact Framework is for development on Mobile devices and necessary only if
you are developing for mobile. 2.0 and 3.0 I would definitely keep. If you
have no installed 1.0 or 1.1 apps, you can get rid of those.

--
Gregory A. Beamer
MVP; MCP: +I, SE, SD, DBA

*********************************************
Think outside the box!
*********************************************
 
Ad

Advertisements

C

Cowboy \(Gregory A. Beamer\)

You also won't be able to use LINQ designers, refactor upgrades, etc. You
can download the March CTP to see most of what will be in the final release.

--
Gregory A. Beamer
MVP; MCP: +I, SE, SD, DBA

*********************************************
Think outside the box!
*********************************************
 
Ad

Advertisements


Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Top