A Windows XP help forum. PCbanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PCbanter forum » Microsoft Windows XP » General XP issues or comments
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Net. Framework



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old February 22nd 12, 01:50 AM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.general
Jeff T[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 111
Default Net. Framework

Do I need net framework? Are there any risks to uninstalling it?


Ads
  #2  
Old February 22nd 12, 01:56 AM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.general
Bruce Hagen[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 895
Default Net. Framework


"Jeff T" wrote in message
...
Do I need net framework? Are there any risks to uninstalling it?



..NET Framework is needed to run programs and no new version supersedes
another.

Just as an example, XP would never run without V: 1.1 and Turbo Tax
requires V: 3.5.
--
Bruce Hagen
MS-MVP Oct. 1, 2004 ~ Sept. 30, 2010
Imperial Beach, CA


  #3  
Old February 22nd 12, 01:57 AM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.general
XP Guy
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 181
Default Net. Framework

Jeff T wrote:

Do I need net framework? Are there any risks to uninstalling it?


Dot Net is not normally part of a standard installation of XP.

If your system has Dot Net, it's probably because some program that was
installed in the past required it.

You might be able to do some detective work on the date-stamp of the dot
net program directory and see when it was installed, and see if that
matches with any apps in your program_files directory.
  #4  
Old February 22nd 12, 02:12 AM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.general
XP Guy
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 181
Default Net. Framework

Bruce Hagen wrote:

Just as an example, XP would never run without V: 1.1


Um, I think that's wrong.

The only versions of XP that came with (or defaulted to installing) .net
we

- Media Center
- Tablet PC Edition

After that, .net began to appear as default OS components with Server
2003 and up (including Vista).

For home and Pro versions of XP (sp1/2/3) .net came on CD, but was an
optional component and not installed as a manditory OS component.

See here for details:

http://www.msigeek.com/2390/what-ver...sion-of-the-os
  #5  
Old February 22nd 12, 02:36 AM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.general
Paul
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12,562
Default Net. Framework

Jeff T wrote:

Do I need net framework? Are there any risks to uninstalling it?


Well, consider an analogy.

If you download a Java program, or visit a website which uses
Java in the browser, chances are you'll need some Sun/Oracle Java software to
make it work.

The large download for Java or dotNET, provide the libraries
to make the application program work.

In the past, there might have been programs, where the
developer would ship you some code, but included, was a small
additional package with redistributable libraries from Microsoft.

By comparison, dotNET is huge, and the libraries are too big
to be carting around with every download.

So Microsoft (in the embrace and extend sense), wants you
to pro-actively download the libraries ahead of time, so
if you happen to buy or download a program from the Microsoft
ecosystem, it will work.

*******

On the practical side, application programs can approach the
library existence problem two ways. The program can check
whether you've installed the necessary library, and provide
a plain English message detailing what is wrong and how to fix it.

But the dotNET programs I've tried here, give a cryptic error
if their dependency is not satisfied. You'll see some
kind of complaint about "mscoree.dll" being missing. And
that is part of dotNET. It means you need some version of
dotNET installed. The application program, will have a CLR
or common language runtime version number, that it seeks, which
gives a hint about what layer of dotNET might be needed.

*******

You can also scan the C: drive, looking for programs which have
a dotNET dependency. And based on that, decide whether you
could delete dotNET or not. But once it is on your system,
you might as well leave it. It's a done deal, and too much
of a nuisance to clean up. The time to think about it, is
*before* it is installed. If you actually bought a dotNET
program, you would have ended up actively searching for the
appropriate download to resolve the dependency. You would then
know you needed that layer of dotNET. If Microsoft
is shoving the download in your face, then chances are you
don't need it. (I still have a pending download in my
Windows Update, which is an example of such shoving, and
I just leave the stinker sitting there, because I don't
need it. My system is not complaining.) It's been sitting
there like this, for a while now.

http://img69.imageshack.us/img69/9003/mynetmess.gif

My system needs dotNET 2.0, to run the ATI video card control
panel. That would be the initial reason for having 2.0 on my
system. If you had an Nvidia video card, you might not need it.
Not every control panel would use it. But ATI decided to use it,
and if you pop the ATI install CD for the video card into the
computer, it has a copy of dotNET specifically for that purpose.
That's how 2.0 got on my system. Windows Update, updated the
initial version, to 2.0 SP2, which is still fine and performing
a useful service. But bumping it up to 3.5 is unnecessary (3.5
is a layer above 2.0 and adds more features, if needed).

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...DotNet.svg.png

To check what layers of dotNET are on your system, you can use
the Verifier. While Add/Remove can also tell you this, this
tool will also attempt to run a program using the layer, to
prove it actually works. This won't tell you whether it is
absolutely needed, as that requires scanning the entire system.
Microsoft doesn't appear to be interested in telling us such a
detail, with the tools they offer. You have to figure that
out for yourself.

http://blogs.msdn.com/b/astebner/arc...3/8999004.aspx

Paul
  #6  
Old February 22nd 12, 02:42 AM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.general
Bruce Hagen[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 895
Default Net. Framework


"XP Guy" wrote in message ...
Bruce Hagen wrote:

Just as an example, XP would never run without V: 1.1


Um, I think that's wrong.

The only versions of XP that came with (or defaulted to installing) .net
we

- Media Center
- Tablet PC Edition

After that, .net began to appear as default OS components with Server
2003 and up (including Vista).

For home and Pro versions of XP (sp1/2/3) .net came on CD, but was an
optional component and not installed as a manditory OS component.

See here for details:

http://www.msigeek.com/2390/what-ver...sion-of-the-os




QP
The only versions of XP that came with (or defaulted to installing) .net
we

- Media Center
- Tablet PC Edition
/QP

Perhaps that was what I was remembering.
--
Bruce Hagen
MS-MVP Oct. 1, 2004 ~ Sept. 30, 2010
Imperial Beach, CA

  #7  
Old February 22nd 12, 04:28 AM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.general
Mayayana
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,175
Default Net. Framework

| Do I need net framework? Are there any risks to uninstalling it?
|

As usual, Paul provided just about anything you might
want to know about the subject.

It's not native to XP.
It's an extra, contained system, similar to Java.
But you could have .Net software, especially if
you haven't made an effort not to. Like Java,
..Net is not *really* common but some people
use software that needs it.

See here for a tool you can download that will
tell you what, if any, installed software requires
..Net:

http://www.jsware.net/jsware/scripts.php5#peops

Explanation and information is in the download.


  #8  
Old February 22nd 12, 05:17 AM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.general
Ken Springer[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,685
Default Net. Framework

On 2/21/12 5:50 PM, Jeff T wrote:
Do I need net framework? Are there any risks to uninstalling it?


If like me, you use Yahoo Messenger, it apparently requires #4. There's
a couple trouble reports for YM not working right in Vista and XP where
the solution was to remove Java, Net 4, and something else, then reinstall.


--
Ken

Mac OS X 10.6.8
Firefox 10.0.2
Thunderbird 10.0.2
LibreOffice 3.4.5
  #9  
Old February 22nd 12, 07:12 AM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.general
Paul
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12,562
Default Net. Framework

Ken Springer wrote:
On 2/21/12 5:50 PM, Jeff T wrote:
Do I need net framework? Are there any risks to uninstalling it?


If like me, you use Yahoo Messenger, it apparently requires #4. There's
a couple trouble reports for YM not working right in Vista and XP where
the solution was to remove Java, Net 4, and something else, then reinstall.


The picture here, of the layers in the stack, makes it
hard to understand why they'd need .NET 4. The two
components listed are Parallel LINQ and Task Parallel Library.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...DotNet.svg.png

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallel_Extensions

You'd think there would be enough support for Threads,
in some other lower layer of the "cake".

There's even an article on Threading for .NET 1.1.
So basic threading was there from the beginning.

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/libr...(v=VS.71).aspx

I suppose they could have done it, just to force users
to download .NET 4.0.

Paul



  #10  
Old February 22nd 12, 07:36 AM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.general
VanguardLH[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,778
Default Net. Framework

Bruce Hagen wrote:

Jeff T wrote ...

Do I need net framework? Are there any risks to uninstalling it?


.NET Framework is needed to run programs and no new version supersedes
another.

Just as an example, XP would never run without V: 1.1 and Turbo Tax
requires V: 3.5.


Since Windows XP was released in 2001 and .Net Framework in 2002, how
could Windows XP be dependent on Net Framework? When released, Windows
XP couldn't include any .NET libraries since they didn't exist yet. I
don't of anything in Windows XP, even with service packs, that requires
..Net other than perhaps ancilliary utilities. You can install Windows
XP gold edition with no updates and it runs as do non-.Net apps on it.

The OS isn't dependent on Net Framework. *Applications* that are
dependent on it. Net is a application development environment and
allows many programming languages (well, Microsoft's languages, that
is). It provides a coding environment along with more libraries (with
much larger scope than available for programming languages, like C++,
and comparable in scope to Java standard libraries). You don't have to
use it for app coding as it provides another coding layer to access the
OS but this requires more system resources that access the system API or
machine resources more directly.

Although .Net is commonly used as an abbreviation, the correct term is
..Net Framework. It is a framework in which to code applications. See:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_framework

Before .Net Framework, Microsoft provided the MFC (Microsoft Foundation
Class) library to assist C++ developers in application development.
Mozilla has theirs, there's Netbeans, Eclipse, and many others. Adding
a framework assisted coders but can add to code bloat. The incorporated
libraries include methods that the coder may never exercise.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off






All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:12 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2014 PCbanter.
The comments are property of their posters.