Microsoft .NET

  • Thread starter Thread starter Lawson
  • Start date Start date
L

Lawson

Guest
Is it necessary to have Microsoft .NET framwork 1.1, 2.0, and 3.0? It seems
a little redundant to me. Can the older versions be removed safely without
any performance issues? Just wondering.
 
Re: Microsoft .NET

No it doesn't work that way.

If you have an application that uses/needs .NET 1.1 then 2.0 and 3.0 are not
to be considered supersets of 1.x
So if you where to delete 1.1 then there is a good chance the application
will fail.

Each version of .NET is usually installed along with the application that
requires it, so if you have all three versions then chances are that
somewhere along the way you installed at a minimum 3 applications, with each
of those 3 applications requiring it's own version of .NET

JS

"Lawson" <Lawson@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:70451013-F8A8-4460-8CF9-4D4BF08A47F5@microsoft.com...
> Is it necessary to have Microsoft .NET framwork 1.1, 2.0, and 3.0? It
> seems
> a little redundant to me. Can the older versions be removed safely
> without
> any performance issues? Just wondering.
 
Re: Microsoft .NET

On Fri, 4 Jul 2008 07:44:01 -0700, Lawson
<Lawson@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:

> Is it necessary to have Microsoft .NET framwork 1.1, 2.0, and 3.0? It seems
> a little redundant to me. Can the older versions be removed safely without
> any performance issues? Just wondering.


No. Some programs requiring the .net framework require specific
versions. It's best to keep them all. Besides, they use a tiny amount
of disk space.


--
Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP - Windows Desktop Experience
Please Reply to the Newsgroup
 
Re: Microsoft .NET

Not only must you keep the versions you mentioned, for the reasons given
above, you seem to be missing .NET Framework 3.5 - so go get it.

"Lawson" <Lawson@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:70451013-F8A8-4460-8CF9-4D4BF08A47F5@microsoft.com...
> Is it necessary to have Microsoft .NET framwork 1.1, 2.0, and 3.0? It
> seems
> a little redundant to me. Can the older versions be removed safely
> without
> any performance issues? Just wondering.
 
Back
Top