To Robert Gault:
Some quick points:
Your comment:
One, you assume that NET Frame will damage your computer. That could be
true but why assume it is true.
I can assume it is true because of the long history of bugs, errors,
incompatabilities and other horrors that the Windows family tree has passed
off on us. The simple fact that you can include a phrase such as "That could
be true" makes my point.
So I would prefer to understand what the program is and how it is supposed
to work before inflicting it on my machine. At this point, I have inferred
from prior comments that .NET is some form of programming language. If you
will note, in my first post I asked what .NET was and what its function is.
The link I was passed off to provides this information:
"The Microsoft .NET Framework version 2.0 redistributable package installs
the .NET Framework runtime and associated files required to run applications
developed to target the .NET Framework v2.0."
Which to a non-programmer sounds so self-referential as to be a tautology:
"A installs A which is designed to run A". Totally void of meaning.
Also, the linked page states:
"The .NET Framework version 2.0 improves scalability and performance of
applications with improved caching, application deployment and updating with
ClickOnce, support for the broadest array of browsers and devices with
ASP.NET 2.0 controls and services."
Again, to a non-programmer, the only thing in that sentence that approaches
comprehensibility is "support for the broadest array of browsers". When the
only thing that is understandable in a description informs you that the
program does something you don't care about, you lose your enthusiasm for
working with the product.
Two, if someone wrote a program you wanted to use but did so, for
example, using DirectX calls would you complain because you then had to
get a copy of DirectX to run the program? I'd bet you have bought many
programs requiring DirectX.
While I haven't bought DirectX-related programs, I have purchased software
from people I have perceived to be reliable. One of the problems here is
that, in addition to a general reputation for unreliability on the part of
Microsoft, I know that the software that I do purchase makes available to me
people who can support their product. And by support I do not mean foisting
responsibility for service off on the manufacturer of my box, who may or may
not be capable of answering questions, nor do I mean charging me money for
the right to call and ask for assistance if a problem arises. So if .NET is
going to screw up my OS, I want either the maker of my OS or the makers of
..NET to be there to solve the problem. ANd we all know that MS will not be
there to solve the problems.
SyncToy seems to have been written to run using NET Frame which means
that the author could use a high level language to simplify his efforts.
If you don't want to acquire NET Frame, no one is forcing you.
On this point you are right. I don't have to acquire the .NET program and
probably won't, because I still don't know what it does, what it is used for,
or what it will do to my computer.
When someone can give me an explanations to those points, maybe I'll
reconsider.
