On Windows XP:

(1) Does the regular (non-doftware developer) business user have any need to install .Net Framework pack 3?

(2) When you have .Net Framework pack 2 installed, is there any need to also install the earlier .Net Framework pack 1?

Edited December 3, 200718 yr by scott14

As far as the ordinary user is concerned, need for .NET is rare. Yes, some applications require it, but most of us can use an alternative for the same (or similar) task. Some of the programs that use .NET require specific versions, so sometimes one uses pack1 while another uses pack2 or 3. Or combinations thereof.

if you have no .NET dependent applications, and are not into writing programs with the framework, it can be removed. Ditto if disk space is an issue. Many of us just keep it around 'in case.'

I've always wondered why Microsoft didn't make it optional anyway.

(1) Does the regular (non-doftware developer) business user have any need to install .Net Framework pack 3?

It depends on if you use any software which relies on Microsoft .NET Framework 3. In other words, you're the only one who can answer this question as you know what is installed

(2) When you have .Net Framework pack 2 installed, is there any need to also install the earlier .Net Framework pack 1?

Again, if you have software which relies on Microsoft .NET Framework 1, yes. Otherwise the answer is no. Only you can answer this question

Keep in mind that Microsoft .NET Framework 2 does not contain version 1. Microsoft .NET Framework 3 does contain version 2, but also does not contain version 1.

So what you are saying is .NET is unlike Java, where if you have 1.6 you can run anything dating all the way back to 1.3 version for the most part? The reason I ask is because i have more knowledge on Java than on the .NET framework and I would like to know becasue there are some utilities written for windows that depend on these .NET framework runtimes.

So what you are saying is .NET is unlike Java, where if you have 1.6 you can run anything dating all the way back to 1.3 version for the most part?

Yes, Microsoft .NET Framework and Java are not the same when it comes to this. See my previous reply as well.

To summarize what others have already posted, if you have .NET 3.0 installed you do not need version 2.0. If you already have 2.0, I don't *think* you need to uninstall it before installing 3.0.

If you are using programs that require it, you will need to install .NET 1.0 as well, since neither 2.0 or 3.0 can be substituted for it.

.net framework 2.0 installs sme 1.1 files and create a 1.1 direcory in C:\windows\micosoft .net directory

it maps 1.1 queries to 2.0 dlls (i think so)

.net framwork 3.0 need 2.0 to be installed on the system

(to verify this extract dotnetfx3.exe and see the .net 2.0 installer inside the 3.0 installer)

so first .net 3.0 installs 2.0 and then 3.0 components (WPF,WCF, etc)

the 2.0 installs its reqired 1.1 compnents

BTW u endup with u r system havin 1.1, 2.0 & 3.0 versions of .net wen u install 3.0

i dont think any programs using 1.0 , realey u can find some old programs usin 1.1 version of .net

most of .net apps use 2.0 or 3.0 nowadays (VS 2005 or 2008 compiled)

info some VS 2008 apps need .net fw version 3.5

1101doc, Arie, suryad, TheFlash428 and Innocent Devil,

thanks to each of you for the good replies.

Scott

To summarize what others have already posted, if you have .NET 3.0 installed you do not need version 2.0. If you already have 2.0, I don't *think* you need to uninstall it before installing 3.0.

Microsoft .NET Framework 3 requires version 2, so what you wrote is incorrect. Please see my previous replies.

.net 3.0 need 2.0 and installs 2.0

.net 2.0 need 1.1 and installs 1.1

so if u install 3.0

it install both 1.1 & 2.0

that's it

ASAT