Puzzled about the versions and service packs

  • Thread starter Thread starter Pavils Jurjans
  • Start date Start date
P

Pavils Jurjans

Hello,

I am somewhat puzzled now about the .NET framework installation stuff:

There apparently are two minor versions of the framework: ver 1.0, and ver
1.1. There is a version 2.0 in beta stage.
Ig I am setting up the .NET framework on a new computer, should I install
both ver 1.0 and ver 1.1? Do they co-exist without comflicts, of in other
words, are they sort of two technically independent frameworks. Or, should I
better install only ver 1.1 (it's kind of "newer and better" version of the
framework?), and install the version 1.0 *only* if some .NET software I need
to run is designed to run only in ver 1.0?

Then, there are the service packs. They claim to be cumulative. So, if the
two framework versions are technically two different softwares, it makes
sense to think that if I have only version 1.1 installed, I need to look
only for service packs designed for version 1.1, and care not for those of
version 1.0?

As a developer, should I prefer the version 1.1 and compile my code with SDK
1.1? Why / why not?

Sorry, if these questions appear to be basic, but the MS home page fails to
crea this mess up. I am sort of surprised that on the official .NET
framework homepage www.microsoft.com/net , in the section "What is .NET?",
it makes you feel that it's a technology for designing web services. Am I
the only person who assumes that the .NET framework is excellent for writing
console applications, windows applications, web applications, etc. ? Why
does the official homepage performs such a disservice and misinformation
about the framework?

Regards,

Pavils
 
Pavils Jurjans said:
Hello,

I am somewhat puzzled now about the .NET framework installation stuff:

There apparently are two minor versions of the framework: ver 1.0, and ver
1.1. There is a version 2.0 in beta stage.
Ig I am setting up the .NET framework on a new computer, should I install
both ver 1.0 and ver 1.1? Do they co-exist without comflicts, of in other
words, are they sort of two technically independent frameworks. Or, should
I better install only ver 1.1 (it's kind of "newer and better" version of
the framework?), and install the version 1.0 *only* if some .NET software
I need to run is designed to run only in ver 1.0?
Click to expand...

Correct. The two will install side-by-side, but most 1.0 assemblies will
run fine on 1.1. So you should stick with 1.1.
Then, there are the service packs. They claim to be cumulative. So, if the
two framework versions are technically two different softwares, it makes
sense to think that if I have only version 1.1 installed, I need to look
only for service packs designed for version 1.1, and care not for those of
version 1.0?
Correct.


As a developer, should I prefer the version 1.1 and compile my code with
SDK 1.1? Why / why not?
Click to expand...

1.1 fixed some problems and made some enhancements, so there's no reason to
use 1.0 any more.
Sorry, if these questions appear to be basic, but the MS home page fails
to crea this mess up. I am sort of surprised that on the official .NET
framework homepage www.microsoft.com/net , in the section "What is .NET?",
it makes you feel that it's a technology for designing web services. Am I
the only person who assumes that the .NET framework is excellent for
writing console applications, windows applications, web applications, etc.
?
Click to expand...

You are correct. .NET is a giant leap forward in programming all kinds of
windows apps. Web Services used to be hard. Integrating applications
across different technologies used to be hard. Not only was it hard, it was
highly visible and expensive. In short, Web Services solve a problem which
CIO's were worried about: thus the marketing emphasis.
Why does the official homepage performs such a disservice and
misinformation about the framework?
Click to expand...

Because only people like us get excited about console apps.

David
 
Back
Top