New
#11
Hello all!
.net Framework is a confusing beast. Hopefully I can unmuddle everyone!
.net Framework 3.0 and 3.5 and not true new versions. They both build on version 2.0, and therefore require 2.0 to operate. If they had repackaged all of the unchanged files, wasting disk space of course, they would have been called proper versions. If a file in 3.0 is unchanged from 2.0, it just redirects to 2.0, storing only the changed files. This is very understandable.
- 1.0: Proper .net Framework.
- 1.1: Relies on 1.0 being installed. If it is not, it installs 1.0.
- 2.0: Proper .net Framework.
- 3.0: Relies on 2.0 being installed. If it is not, it installs 2.0.
- 3.5: Relies on 3.0 and 2.0 being installed, and installs them if necessary.
- 4.0: Proper .net Framework.
- 4.0 Extended: Relies on 4.0 Client version being installed, and installs if necessary (Full package includes Extended, Client package does not)
- Updates for any of them (such as security updates): Require the associated full version.
- Service Pack (SP1 etc.) Redistributables downloads from the Microsoft website: Obviously require the original version to actually work, but HAVE THEM BUILT IN! Downloading the original version prior to Service Packs from the Microsoft Download Centre is NEVER required. Don't fret! (not Windows or Office Service packs obviously; this only applies to .net Redist and Visual C++ Redist Service Packs) Security updates DO NOT have the original version built in.
.net Framework are separate applications which install side by side, and compliment and NEVER conflict. Well done johnnya! Very well done.
- Vista: Includes .net Framework 3.0 (and 2.0 to make it work) by default (Windows Features)
- 7: Includes .net Framework 3.5 (and 3.0 and 2.0 to make it work) by default (Windows Features)
So, they are designed to be installed side by side, but do you need them all?
Basically, yes. Certainly, uninstalling 2.0 and 3.0 will break 3.5. Trying to uninstall 4.0 Client will break Extended (although you won't be able to with the normal uninstaller anyway because that will really mess things up!)
So, do you need them all!?
An application coded for 4.0 will not work on 3.5. This is obvious. An application coded for 3.5 will not necessarily work on 4.0.
So YES! You need to keep them all!
In theory at least, to make every application run, you need all of the following .net Frameworks:
1.0 (1.0.3705)
1.1 (1.1.4322)
2.0 (2.0.50727)
3.0
3.5
4.0 (4.0.30319)
However, 1.0 and 1.1 are SO old that you NEVER, and I actually mean NEVER EVER EVER EVER need them on Vista and 7.
You most certainly need 2.0, as that is what most applications use. Then 3.5, and then 4.0 (number of programs using them) I am not quite sure where 1.0, 1.1 and 3.0 fit in.
So, leave them all installed would be my advice.
And just for completeness, a little bit about Client and Full:
The size difference is marginal. 41.0MB vs. 48.1 MB. The Full is required if you create .net Applications from scratch (ie you are a programmer) It contains a few additional features. Just a few. You as an end user won't use them. You only really need Client. If, however, you DO happen to install an application which uses these features, it will bundle the Full in as well. It will do, because it knows that almost no users will have the Full, and the application will crash if it doesn't bundle it in with the installer. You will then have the Full.
For the sake of a few MBs, and a quicker install some time later, just leave the Full on your system.
For further information about Client and Full, see:
So, leave .net Framework well alone, otherwise applications requiring it which do not bundle it with the installer (bad applications, they ALWAYS should) will crash - Stopped Working and was Closed most likely.
And after all, any non-defaultly installed .net Frameworks has either been installed by you, or far more likely, but one of your favourite applications which will now crash without much warning or explanation.
One final quote from cluberti, MCTS: Windows Internals, MCITP Server 2008 EA, MCTS MDT/BDD, MCSE/MCSA Server 2003
I hope that this helps, and clears up all confusion.
Richard