Is this really needed?

[sweater]

Do we really need the .NET Framework v2? ::) ???

Coz I think I still have .NET Framework v1.1 and I have no problem w it... v2 has a big file. :P

If ever that we really need it, then, is there a need to remove and uninstall the v1.1 from our system before installing the v2? ???

Have you experience any problem w it? ???

[WSFuser]

u only need it for certain apps like paint.net 2.6 alpha/beta, some apps like winxp manager or the current 2.5 of paint.net still use .net 1.1. also u can install .net 2.0 alongside v1.1 of the framework.

[sweater]

You mean... it just acts like any other software programs that I can easily installs? ??? coz i was thinking then, that it might complicate some other areas of windows system... and needs "some other things" before we installs it. ::)

I have windows xp pro sp2, and was confused if i really need this.

Are u using it now in your pc? ???

[gerardwil]

Both installed here.

Gerard

[Howard Kaikow]

-{ Quote: "You mean... it just acts like any other software programs that I can easily installs? ??? coz i was thinking then, that it might complicate some other areas of windows system... and needs "some other things" before we installs it. ::)

I have windows xp pro sp2, and was confused if i really need this.

Are u using it now in your pc? ???" }-

Just as you need the VB6 runtimes to run programs written in VB 6. you need the .net framework to run programs written using .net.

For some programs, you may need a particular version of .NET. For example, Ghost 10 requires .NET 1.1.

One question is WHY do you already have .NET 1.1 or 2.0?
Did you allow windows update to automatically install the critters?
Those components are optional, unless you are running programs that require them.

[Tassie_Devils]

Sweater, you ONLY net .net if you are going to use some programs requiring it. [they will alert you to that when you try to install]

I personally do not have/need net yet, it's mainly used for programming in certain forms + some programs that WDFuser and Howard outlined, but generally speaking, the vast majority of people do *not* need it.

Now, you will know if it's needed when you go to install certain prorgrams, as they will simply say you *need* to have .net installed, I wanted to try a couple of programs myself, went to install, but when it said .net was needed I did not bother, did not need the program that bad. :gack:

Cheers, TAS

[Brinn]

-{ Quote: "Both installed here.

Gerard" }-
Is 1.1 redundant if you have 2.0? I can't tell from my perusing of the MS download site.

[Howard Kaikow]

-{ Quote: "Is 1.1 redundant if you have 2.0? I can't tell from my perusing of the MS download site." }-

No.

Because some Net programs may have been written so they will work only in 1.1, not necessarily with 2.0.

[Brinn]

Hmm, I had hoped that 2.0 was written to be backward compatible with 1.1 apps. Oh well, I'll only install it if I need it then.

[Howard Kaikow]

-{ Quote: "Hmm, I had hoped that 2.0 was written to be backward compatible with 1.1 apps. Oh well, I'll only install it if I need it then." }-

It may have been, but software developed under 1.1 has to be tested under 2, to make sure there are no issues.

An allergy, I mean analogy, is Office VBA macros.

A properly written macro in version x of, say Word, SHOULD work with no change in version x+1, but this is not always so.

For example, I purchased Ghost 10 which requires 1.1.
Now if I uninstall 1.1 and install 2.0, what happens if I encounter a problem?
Will Symantec's tech support blame 2.0?
Legally, they could.

Will they issue a fix that works in 2.0?
I wouldn't count on it.

[Brinn]

-{ Quote: "It may have been, but software developed under 1.1 has to be tested under 2, to make sure there are no issues." }-
All I wanted to know was if 2.0 was an upgrade to 1.1 or a separate platform. If it was an upgrade, I understand that not all apps will make the jump seamlessly.