J
John
Hi
What is the significance of net framework 3.0 for vs 2005 users?
Thanks
Regards
What is the significance of net framework 3.0 for vs 2005 users?
Thanks
Regards
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
M
Mark Rae
What is the significance of net framework 3.0 for vs 2005 users?
http://www.google.co.uk/search?sour...GLG,GGLG:2006-28,GGLG:en&q=.net+framework+3.0
P
Patrice
I'm not sure what the question is ?
3.0 is 2.0 plus additional features (it doesn't change anything in 2.0, it
just adds new capabilities). You can also download VS 2005 extensions that
adds support for those new features in VS.NET.
3.0 is 2.0 plus additional features (it doesn't change anything in 2.0, it
just adds new capabilities). You can also download VS 2005 extensions that
adds support for those new features in VS.NET.
K
Karl Seguin
For the most part, .NET Framework 3.0 will have it's own development tools.
3.0 isn't like 1.x and 2.0...it's a new subset of libraries. It's a really
stupid naming choice they made.
There are extensions for 2005
(http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/...9E-1FA3-48CF-8023-E8F38E709BA6&displaylang=en)
so they are supported.
I don't know how the 2005 extensions compare to the actual 3.0 tools (like
expression and whatever else they are called).
Karl
3.0 isn't like 1.x and 2.0...it's a new subset of libraries. It's a really
stupid naming choice they made.
There are extensions for 2005
(http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/...9E-1FA3-48CF-8023-E8F38E709BA6&displaylang=en)
so they are supported.
I don't know how the 2005 extensions compare to the actual 3.0 tools (like
expression and whatever else they are called).
Karl
G
Guest
3.0 is 2.0 plus additional features (it doesn't change anything in
2.0, it just adds new capabilities). You can also download VS 2005
extensions that adds support for those new features in VS.NET.
I think it was a bad idea for MS to label it as .NET 3.0. Many companies
are still transitioning to .NET 2.0, and here comes a "new framework".
MS should have just labelled it .NET 2.5 so that it's easier to sollow.
M
Mark Rae
I think it was a bad idea for MS to label it as .NET 3.0. Many companies
are still transitioning to .NET 2.0, and here comes a "new framework".
I *totally* agree!
P
Patrice
I believe they changed their mind to include ".NET" because the new WPF, WCF
etc... names caused some people to think it was something totally new and
even perhaps something that would replace the .NET Framework !!
Now with the "3.0" tag, one can think this is an update to the existing 2.0.
I would have said ".NET 2.0 Extensions" or something similar. On the other
hand WPF is really a whole new beast so I'm not sure how it should have been
named...
Patrice
etc... names caused some people to think it was something totally new and
even perhaps something that would replace the .NET Framework !!
Now with the "3.0" tag, one can think this is an update to the existing 2.0.
I would have said ".NET 2.0 Extensions" or something similar. On the other
hand WPF is really a whole new beast so I'm not sure how it should have been
named...
Patrice
M
Michael D. Ober
The fact that Framework 3.0 has at it's core, Framework 2.0 is a good thing.
Maybe MS has stabilized our development environment for a few years. People
who jumped on Framework 1.0 have had to potentially change code not once
(Framework 1.1), but twice now. That's a surefire way to piss off your
developers and get the to start looking at, and some will recommend, other
OSs.
Mike Ober.
Maybe MS has stabilized our development environment for a few years. People
who jumped on Framework 1.0 have had to potentially change code not once
(Framework 1.1), but twice now. That's a surefire way to piss off your
developers and get the to start looking at, and some will recommend, other
OSs.
Mike Ober.