Microsoft .NET Framework xx - which one?

I see today that 3 versions of MS .NET Framework have been updated
- version 3.5
- version 3.0 SP1
- version 2.0 SP1

Do I need any of these with Vista? What for? Any why are there almost as
many falvours as Vista, co-existing at the same time?

Thanks for any clear explanations

There is a good video on Microsoft's Channel 9 that may help explain why
multiple versions exist.
http://channel9.msdn.com/ShowPost.as...=369588#369588

"occam" <> wrote in message
news:...
> I see today that 3 versions of MS .NET Framework have been updated
> - version 3.5
> - version 3.0 SP1
> - version 2.0 SP1
>
> Do I need any of these with Vista? What for? Any why are there almost as
> many falvours as Vista, co-existing at the same time?
>
> Thanks for any clear explanations

> I see today that 3 versions of MS .NET Framework have been updated
> - version 3.5
> - version 3.0 SP1
> - version 2.0 SP1
>
> Do I need any of these with Vista? What for? Any why are there almost as
> many falvours as Vista, co-existing at the same time?
>
.Net is a programming system that Microsoft came up
with in 2001. It's sort of Microsoft's version of Java. Like
Java, software written in .Net needs a large collection of
support files, which Microsoft calls a "framework". (In Java
it's called a "virtual machine".) Without those files, the
software can't run.

Since 2001 there have been several versions of the
..Net system and therefore the .Net framework. They
are not all entirely compatible. So if you have any .Net
software installed you may need one or more of the
frameworks. You may not have any .Net software. It's
not very commonly used for standard "desktop" software.
It's used more for things like "web-based" software on
corporate intranets, again like Java. But there are a few
programs written in .Net for the desktop.

So, do you need the framworks? Maybe. Maybe not.
If you don't mind 100MB+ of possibly superfluous extra
stuff on your system then you can have all the frameworks
and not worry about it. If you want to have a lean system
for some reason, you can try uninstalling all frameworks
and then see if all of your software still works OK. The
sign that you are trying to run .Net software without the
required framework is that you see a message saying
something like, "mscoree.dll was not found".

mayayana wrote:
>> I see today that 3 versions of MS .NET Framework have been updated
>> - version 3.5
>> - version 3.0 SP1
>> - version 2.0 SP1
>>
>> Do I need any of these with Vista? What for? Any why are there almost as
>> many falvours as Vista, co-existing at the same time?
>>
> .Net is a programming system that Microsoft came up
> with in 2001. It's sort of Microsoft's version of Java. Like
> Java, software written in .Net needs a large collection of
> support files, which Microsoft calls a "framework". (In Java
> it's called a "virtual machine".) Without those files, the
> software can't run.
>
> Since 2001 there have been several versions of the
> .Net system and therefore the .Net framework. They
> are not all entirely compatible. So if you have any .Net
> software installed you may need one or more of the
> frameworks. You may not have any .Net software. It's
> not very commonly used for standard "desktop" software.
> It's used more for things like "web-based" software on
> corporate intranets, again like Java. But there are a few
> programs written in .Net for the desktop.
>
> So, do you need the framworks? Maybe. Maybe not.
> If you don't mind 100MB+ of possibly superfluous extra
> stuff on your system then you can have all the frameworks
> and not worry about it. If you want to have a lean system
> for some reason, you can try uninstalling all frameworks
> and then see if all of your software still works OK. The
> sign that you are trying to run .Net software without the
> required framework is that you see a message saying
> something like, "mscoree.dll was not found".
>
>

Thanks. I see I have .NET 1.1 installed, but no later versions.

Obviously I do not need 2.0, 3.0 or 3.5 - else I would have seen an
error or two.

You do not have to worry about it. I think Vista Business and Ultimate come
with
v 2.0. At least this is what appears on your start menu. In fact it may be
higher.

All those versions are for developers. People who work with new versions of
C# v3.0 and Linq classes have to upgrade their .NET framework to I believe
3.0 or higher. I think the actual version is 3.1. There is something called
..NET 3.5. Even developers do not have to keep this jamboree of numbers on
the ready. If they try to install the newest version of Visual Studio 2008
(which is almost like Vista versus XP for VS2005) the install will
automatically provide the prerequisites.

On the very remote, theoretical level some exotic software packages may not
work with lower .NET version because there will be no support for them in
the machine. By the time such applications become mainstream .NET of that
grade will be a commonplace.

If it is still unclear, I will try to provide direct references to MS
developers sites. It is a hard stuff for a person who never seen it.

"occam" <> wrote in message
news:...
>I see today that 3 versions of MS .NET Framework have been updated
> - version 3.5
> - version 3.0 SP1
> - version 2.0 SP1
>
> Do I need any of these with Vista? What for? Any why are there almost as
> many falvours as Vista, co-existing at the same time?
>
> Thanks for any clear explanations

Thanks AlexB, this is sufficient explanation for now.

AlexB wrote:
> You do not have to worry about it. I think Vista Business and Ultimate
> come with
> v 2.0. At least this is what appears on your start menu. In fact it may
> be higher.
>
> All those versions are for developers. People who work with new versions
> of C# v3.0 and Linq classes have to upgrade their .NET framework to I
> believe 3.0 or higher. I think the actual version is 3.1. There is
> something called .NET 3.5. Even developers do not have to keep this
> jamboree of numbers on the ready. If they try to install the newest
> version of Visual Studio 2008 (which is almost like Vista versus XP for
> VS2005) the install will automatically provide the prerequisites.
>
> On the very remote, theoretical level some exotic software packages may
> not work with lower .NET version because there will be no support for
> them in the machine. By the time such applications become mainstream
> .NET of that grade will be a commonplace.
>
> If it is still unclear, I will try to provide direct references to MS
> developers sites. It is a hard stuff for a person who never seen it.
>
> "occam" <> wrote in message
> news:...
>> I see today that 3 versions of MS .NET Framework have been updated
>> - version 3.5
>> - version 3.0 SP1
>> - version 2.0 SP1
>>
>> Do I need any of these with Vista? What for? Any why are there almost
>> as many falvours as Vista, co-existing at the same time?
>>
>> Thanks for any clear explanations
>

Its pretty simple, certain applications target certain versions of the .NET
Framework runtime.
--
Andre
Blog: http://adacosta.spaces.live.com
My Vista Quickstart Guide:
http://adacosta.spaces.live.com/blog...3DB!9709.entry
"occam" <> wrote in message
news:...
>
> Thanks AlexB, this is sufficient explanation for now.
>
> AlexB wrote:
>> You do not have to worry about it. I think Vista Business and Ultimate
>> come with
>> v 2.0. At least this is what appears on your start menu. In fact it may
>> be higher.
>>
>> All those versions are for developers. People who work with new versions
>> of C# v3.0 and Linq classes have to upgrade their .NET framework to I
>> believe 3.0 or higher. I think the actual version is 3.1. There is
>> something called .NET 3.5. Even developers do not have to keep this
>> jamboree of numbers on the ready. If they try to install the newest
>> version of Visual Studio 2008 (which is almost like Vista versus XP for
>> VS2005) the install will automatically provide the prerequisites.
>>
>> On the very remote, theoretical level some exotic software packages may
>> not work with lower .NET version because there will be no support for
>> them in the machine. By the time such applications become mainstream .NET
>> of that grade will be a commonplace.
>>
>> If it is still unclear, I will try to provide direct references to MS
>> developers sites. It is a hard stuff for a person who never seen it.
>>
>> "occam" <> wrote in message
>> news:...
>>> I see today that 3 versions of MS .NET Framework have been updated
>>> - version 3.5
>>> - version 3.0 SP1
>>> - version 2.0 SP1
>>>
>>> Do I need any of these with Vista? What for? Any why are there almost as
>>> many falvours as Vista, co-existing at the same time?
>>>
>>> Thanks for any clear explanations
>>

Andre Da Costa[ActiveWin] wrote:
> Its pretty simple, certain applications target certain versions of the .NET
> Framework runtime.

Yes - that may be simple. But very comforting.

Which ones target which - is what i would like to know? I appear to have
1.1, but am not sure if I need to keep it.

The only option open to me appears to be to uninstall it, and see if I
get error prompts.

Andre Da Costa[ActiveWin] wrote:
> Its pretty simple, certain applications target certain versions of the .NET
> Framework runtime.

Yes - that may be simple. But /not/ very comforting.

Which ones target which - is what i would like to know? I appear to have
1.1, but am not sure if I need to keep it.

The only option open to me appears to be to uninstall it, and see if I
get error prompts.

The application would specify that during setup and all you would have to do
is download and install it.
--
Andre
Blog: http://adacosta.spaces.live.com
My Vista Quickstart Guide:
http://adacosta.spaces.live.com/blog...3DB!9709.entry
"occam" <> wrote in message
news:...
> Andre Da Costa[ActiveWin] wrote:
>> Its pretty simple, certain applications target certain versions of the
>> .NET Framework runtime.
>
> Yes - that may be simple. But /not/ very comforting.
>
> Which ones target which - is what i would like to know? I appear to have
> 1.1, but am not sure if I need to keep it.
>
> The only option open to me appears to be to uninstall it, and see if I get
> error prompts.