Coffeehouse Thread

11 posts

Forum Read Only

This forum has been made read only by the site admins. No new threads or comments can be added.

XP Service Pack 3 and .net framework

Back to Forum: Coffeehouse
  • User profile image
    BobGundeck

    Now that XP sp3 is going to testers, I have a question. Does XP sp3 install the .net framework?  If so, which version?

    If there is none, MS should reconsider.  From my experience, the biggest obstacle to clients adopting MS technologies is they do not want to install the framework. 

  • User profile image
    typemismatch

    .net has never been part of service packs so I doubt it .... its stupid but its why they do.

  • User profile image
    YearOfThe​LinuxDesktop

    typemismatch wrote:
    .net has never been part of service packs so I doubt it .... its stupid but its why they do.


    I don't think it's stupid since:
    1) .NET setup and installs waste a lot of space
    2) .NET is released more often than service packs (in the time between SP2-SP3 there will have been 3 .NET releases (2.0, 3.0, 3.5)) so in the future people who will install XP SP3 will get rid of the then old .NET framework in favor of a more recent version
    3) .NET isn't required by XP itself (unless we're talking about windows media center that however is still stuck at 1.1 with the latest cumulative update)
    4) not anybody needs .NET just like not anybody needs java. I actually have only 1 application that rely on .NET (nLite) between the dozens I've installed so it's not that all essential

    probably it would be better for MS if they bundled Silverlight and also added an option to install Windows Live Suite at the end of the SP3 setup.

  • User profile image
    Nick.C

    YearOfTheLinuxDesktop wrote:
    
    4) not anybody needs .NET just like not anybody needs java. I actually have only 1 application that rely on .NET (nLite) between the dozens I've installed so it's not that all essential



    This argumet actually supports the original suggestion for including it in the service pack update.

  • User profile image
    fdisk

    The bigger question is...will it break any existing software? Will it cause any interference with Visual Studio users?

    Expressionless

  • User profile image
    ZippyV

    With Service Pack 2, the .net framework was also provided on the same cd. It's an optional install.

  • User profile image
    rcardona

    Please don't bloat my copy of Windows XP SP3 with the .NET Framework 3.0 or 3.5. There are millions of people who will never run a .NET app (like my mom) who could use that extra 30 - 50 MB+ of space.

  • User profile image
    phreaks

    rcardona said:
    Please don't bloat my copy of Windows XP SP3 with the .NET Framework 3.0 or 3.5. There are millions of people who will never run a .NET app (like my mom) who could use that extra 30 - 50 MB+ of space.

    Yeah well from a corporate point of view, it makes batch updating desktops much easier, and helps to facilitate a corp wide transition to 3.5 which makes dev's a whole lot happier.

    /necropost. whoops! my bad.

  • User profile image
    stevo_

    phreaks said:
    rcardona said:
    *snip*

    Yeah well from a corporate point of view, it makes batch updating desktops much easier, and helps to facilitate a corp wide transition to 3.5 which makes dev's a whole lot happier.

    /necropost. whoops! my bad.

    How?

  • User profile image
    phreaks

    stevo_ said:
    phreaks said:
    *snip*

    How?

    Because desktop support would be be able to push 1 deployment instead of having to push 2. This would be especially helpful in this particular scenario where both deployments potentially may require a reboot and your users are largely researchers whom frequently have calculations running  on their desktops for > 1 day, which creates a significant barrier to introducing updates that require reboots.

  • User profile image
    stevo_

    phreaks said:
    stevo_ said:
    *snip*

    Because desktop support would be be able to push 1 deployment instead of having to push 2. This would be especially helpful in this particular scenario where both deployments potentially may require a reboot and your users are largely researchers whom frequently have calculations running  on their desktops for > 1 day, which creates a significant barrier to introducing updates that require reboots.

    ..did you manage to necropost? Tongue Out

Conversation locked

This conversation has been locked by the site admins. No new comments can be made.