.NET Framework v1.1 needed while v2.0 is installed?

Hi all,

No real issue (so far) as everything seems to work just fine, but can anyone
explain why Windows Update suggests I should install .NET Framework v1.1
while I have v2.0 installed? Doesn't v2.0 cover all v1.1 functionality? And
if so, how about v3.0?

Just trying to keep the system not bulkier than needed. No urgency, pure
curiosity, but any suggestions are welcome. I think they may be useful to
others as well as Microsoft seems to offer no clarity in this matter.


Rob

Net framework 1.1 is needed, 2.0 is not replacing it.

Best regards,
Michel Denie

"Oneinunity" <> wrote in message
news:70560CDC-E4A2-4837-8DE7-...
> Hi all,
>
> No real issue (so far) as everything seems to work just fine, but can
> anyone
> explain why Windows Update suggests I should install .NET Framework v1.1
> while I have v2.0 installed? Doesn't v2.0 cover all v1.1 functionality?
> And
> if so, how about v3.0?
>
> Just trying to keep the system not bulkier than needed. No urgency, pure
> curiosity, but any suggestions are welcome. I think they may be useful to
> others as well as Microsoft seems to offer no clarity in this matter.
>
>
> Rob

Merci beaucoup. Could be expected. I still wonder about 3.0 as that one does
seem to combine the two, but I'll do a bit of research on that on my own.
--
Rob


"realcestmoi" wrote:

> Net framework 1.1 is needed, 2.0 is not replacing it.
>
> Best regards,
> Michel Denie
>
> "Oneinunity" <> wrote in message
> news:70560CDC-E4A2-4837-8DE7-...
> > Hi all,
> >
> > No real issue (so far) as everything seems to work just fine, but can
> > anyone
> > explain why Windows Update suggests I should install .NET Framework v1.1
> > while I have v2.0 installed? Doesn't v2.0 cover all v1.1 functionality?
> > And
> > if so, how about v3.0?
> >
> > Just trying to keep the system not bulkier than needed. No urgency, pure
> > curiosity, but any suggestions are welcome. I think they may be useful to
> > others as well as Microsoft seems to offer no clarity in this matter.
> >
> >
> > Rob
>
>
>

You are most welcome.

Michel


"Oneinunity" <> wrote in message
news:76CC4F51-66F6-44BF-B36C-...
> Merci beaucoup. Could be expected. I still wonder about 3.0 as that one
> does
> seem to combine the two, but I'll do a bit of research on that on my own.
> --
> Rob
>
>
> "realcestmoi" wrote:
>
>> Net framework 1.1 is needed, 2.0 is not replacing it.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Michel Denie
>>
>> "Oneinunity" <> wrote in message
>> news:70560CDC-E4A2-4837-8DE7-...
>> > Hi all,
>> >
>> > No real issue (so far) as everything seems to work just fine, but can
>> > anyone
>> > explain why Windows Update suggests I should install .NET Framework
>> > v1.1
>> > while I have v2.0 installed? Doesn't v2.0 cover all v1.1 functionality?
>> > And
>> > if so, how about v3.0?
>> >
>> > Just trying to keep the system not bulkier than needed. No urgency,
>> > pure
>> > curiosity, but any suggestions are welcome. I think they may be useful
>> > to
>> > others as well as Microsoft seems to offer no clarity in this matter.
>> >
>> >
>> > Rob
>>
>>
>>