"Blithe" <invalid@cox.net> wrote in message
news:uKf0VBN9JHA.5064@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> May I ask a MS knowledgeable or other professional person to help me
> understand 'just how important' for a user like me?
On Wed, 24 Jun 2009 14:56:21 -0500, "Blithe" <invalid@cox.net> wrote:
>A. .Net Framework is 'essential' to software/developer/engineers only
>B. Most Windows users will have no meaningful, substantive need either to
>install .Net Framework & nor have any strong reason that argues against
>uninstalling .Net Framework (assuming that uninstalling will not create
>unexpected or previously reported collateral issues that have not been
>resolved).
It will be 'essential' if the software you purchase requires it to be
installed. MS's plan for world domination includes the ability for
software to run inside or outside the browser, locally or from the
'net, transparently to the user and .net is their pathway to that.
They push it very heavily to developers who will be using it more and
more in applications you purchase.
FYI- there are install issues with 3.5... and it does an awful lot of
calling home at the end under the guise of "optimization". I don't
know if anyone has studied where it calls and what it transports.
On Wed, 24 Jun 2009 08:33:43 -0500, "Blithe" <invalid@cox.net> wrote:
>I experienced endless WinUpdate update issues with .net framework on my W2K
>pc - but so far none with Vista Ultimate.
>
>I just ran 2 'Important' Vista WinUpdates - a hotfix and an update for .net
>framework 3.5 SP1 - no problems.
>
>However - it occurs to me that I never got a firm idea just how important
>.Net Framework is to the average user like myself who's much less a PC
>enthusiast than I was almost 20 years ago & primarily today more an email
>and news junkie. So I checked out what Wikipedia posts on Net Framework -
>and except for nerdy gobbledygook - got precisely no idea just how important
>.NET Framework is to me.
>
>May I ask a MS knowledgeable or other professional person to help me
>understand 'just how important' for a user like me? If WinUpdate indicates
>it's not 'essential' - than what exactly do I lose, if anything, by
>uninstalling .NET Framework?
>
>Please advise - Blithe
The .NET framework is a set of libraries (plus a few other things). If
you don't have it on your machine, and you try to install or use an
application which requires it, you'll be told about the problem and
will be able to install it at that point. Until that happens, you
don't need it. Uninstalling it will almost certainly not cause you any
serious problems. If you do have a .NET application on your machine,
then uninstalling the framework will mean those applications will not
run - but that's not a disaster, when you attempt to run them, they'll
complain about the missing framework, and you can reinstall it at that
point.
On Wed, 24 Jun 2009 16:20:57 -0400, +Bob+ <nomailplease@example.com>
wrote:
>On Wed, 24 Jun 2009 15:01:27 -0500, "DaveD" <dd@dd.dd> wrote:
>
>>Very important. MS needs it in order to install security vulnerabilities in
>>Firefox.
>>
>>http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/se...16&tag=nl.e011
>
>Nice!
And Microsoft turned this back within a few weeks (with excuses).
On Wed, 24 Jun 2009 17:06:45 -0400, Vista Succubus Hunter
<Sucuubus@Hunter.com> wrote:
>DaveD wrote:
>> Very important. MS needs it in order to install security vulnerabilities
>> in Firefox.
>>
>> http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/se...16&tag=nl.e011
>>
>
>MS doesn't need FF. So FF is going to dance to MS's tune, if it's to be
>a viable solution on the MS platforms Vista and beyound.
ROTFL
It is nice to see you how totally prejudiced you are.
I assume you feel "assimilated" by Microsoft.
(resistance to Microsoft (and .NET Framework) is futile)
:-)
FredW wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Jun 2009 17:06:45 -0400, Vista Succubus Hunter
> <Sucuubus@Hunter.com> wrote:
>
>> DaveD wrote:
>>> Very important. MS needs it in order to install security vulnerabilities
>>> in Firefox.
>>>
>>> http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/se...16&tag=nl.e011
>>>
>> MS doesn't need FF. So FF is going to dance to MS's tune, if it's to be
>> a viable solution on the MS platforms Vista and beyound.
>
> ROTFL
>
> It is nice to see you how totally prejudiced you are.
So? It puts money in my pockets is the bottom line, the butter on the bread.
> I assume you feel "assimilated" by Microsoft.
> (resistance to Microsoft (and .NET Framework) is futile)
> :-)
I as assimilated by DEC, PDP, Novell, IBM, Apple, Altos, IBC and the
list is long of companies that have put money in my pockets, including
MS, that I written business solutions for the platforms over the years.
On Wed, 24 Jun 2009 23:40:26 +0200, FredW <fredw@blackholespam.net>
wrote:
>>MS doesn't need FF. So FF is going to dance to MS's tune, if it's to be
>>a viable solution on the MS platforms Vista and beyound.
>
> ROTFL
>
>It is nice to see you how totally prejudiced you are.
>I assume you feel "assimilated" by Microsoft.
>(resistance to Microsoft (and .NET Framework) is futile)
> :-)
Not to mention, MS hasn't done that well pushing their proprietary
****e in the last couple years. They keep trying, but the Internet
Community doesn't roll over like others MS has bulldozed.
"gareth erskine-jones" <gsej@uberdog.net> wrote in message
news:b55545t7pctrsgtu2avqpsglk84098boe4@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 24 Jun 2009 08:33:43 -0500, "Blithe" <invalid@cox.net> wrote:
>
>>I experienced endless WinUpdate update issues with .net framework on my
>>W2K
>>pc - but so far none with Vista Ultimate.
>>
>>I just ran 2 'Important' Vista WinUpdates - a hotfix and an update for
>>.net
>>framework 3.5 SP1 - no problems.
>>
>>However - it occurs to me that I never got a firm idea just how important
>>.Net Framework is to the average user like myself who's much less a PC
>>enthusiast than I was almost 20 years ago & primarily today more an email
>>and news junkie. So I checked out what Wikipedia posts on Net Framework -
>>and except for nerdy gobbledygook - got precisely no idea just how
>>important
>>.NET Framework is to me.
>>
>>May I ask a MS knowledgeable or other professional person to help me
>>understand 'just how important' for a user like me? If WinUpdate
>>indicates
>>it's not 'essential' - than what exactly do I lose, if anything, by
>>uninstalling .NET Framework?
>>
>>Please advise - Blithe
>
> The .NET framework is a set of libraries (plus a few other things). If
> you don't have it on your machine, and you try to install or use an
> application which requires it, you'll be told about the problem and
> will be able to install it at that point. Until that happens, you
> don't need it. Uninstalling it will almost certainly not cause you any
> serious problems. If you do have a .NET application on your machine,
> then uninstalling the framework will mean those applications will not
> run - but that's not a disaster, when you attempt to run them, they'll
> complain about the missing framework, and you can reinstall it at that
> point.
>
> GSEJ
Nice explaination.
Question: if you uninstall all your .Net versions, and then run a program
that requires one of them, and you allow its automatic installation, then
will this installation be completely up to date, or will Microsoft's Update
program want to do a few years worth of updates to this .Net version?
Re: .NET Framework - how 'important?' 
Linear Mode
