I have read all contributions to this thread & thank all contributors. I
also just checked the MS .net framework website at:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/zw4w595w.aspx
& read the: ".NET Framework Conceptual Overview" -
which basically states the purpose is to build/develop the essential
components of the next Microsoft OS. Fine.
I have been a patient and at times an unforgiving user of MS OS's since
Windows 3.0 - & had always understood, until now, that the proper, official,
recommended protocol for upgrading a Windows OS has been by installing
Microsoft certified OS Service Packs.
Therefore, considering what Microsoft has certified about the purpose of
..net framework on the above website - is it unreasonable for me to answer
the questions I had originally posted here by concluding???:
A. .Net Framework is 'essential' to software/developer/engineers only
B. Most Windows users will have no meaningful, substantive need either to
install .Net Framework & nor have any strong reason that argues against
uninstalling .Net Framework (assuming that uninstalling will not create
unexpected or previously reported collateral issues that have not been
resolved).
Of course - anyone who chooses to uninstall ought to do so at their own
risk - & that includes me.
Thank you all for this useful discussion- Blithe
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
"ptmx2" <> wrote in message
news:BC5BF980-00B6-46F8-9CA8-...
> thank you for your post.
>
> however, like the OP, I don't know of any programs on my XP_SP3 PC that
> require my PC to have some or all version(s) of .NET Framework installed.
> I
> subscribe to the notion "if I don't need it, then I don't need it". IF in
> tomorrow I need to open, use, or view something that requires .NET
> Framework,
> I will download it.
>
> It does sound like an interesting thing and I have noticed applications
> that
> are using .NET Framework right now. I simply to do not use any of them
> right
> now.
>
> "Vista Succubus Hunter" wrote:
>
>> Blithe wrote:
>> > "Vista Succubus Hunter" <> wrote in message
>> > news:...
>> >> With new programmed applications being created to use .NET and
>> >> existing application being converted to use .NET, the .NET Framework
>> >> is an essential part of the equation that must be present and kept up
>> >> to date on the Windows O/S platform, period.
>> > xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> > Thanks, Hunter, I appreciate your input. Bur the questions I put
>> > remain -
>> > 1. if it's "an essential part" - why does WinUpdate prioritize it as
>> > 'important' only & not essential?
>>
>> Because like the Windows O/S, which is essential, so is the .NET
>> Framework essential. Some consider the .NET Framework to eventually
>> become the Windows O/S in the future.
>>
>> > 2. What does a user like I described lose by either not installing or
>> > uninstalling .NET Framework?
>>
>> A program's ability to run or work properly that has been
>> developed/program against/or using the .NET Framework.
>>
>> > (& can you be more specific by explaining/defining 'essential part of
>> > the equation' with examples?)
>>
>>
>> The .NET Framework is taking over the Windows O/S functionality and/or
>> will supplant the Windows O/S in many areas as you know it, working
>> behind the scene.
>>