Fog Creek Software
Discussion Board




XP SP2 Includes .NET framework

Was interesting to me that the .NET framework is included in this service pack.

Since this SP is getting a relatively high amount of press (thanks to the recent press about "another worm" or "another virus") . . . we should see the NETFX framework footprint open up even more. Obviously, not to the point that "Joel's grandmother" might easily be able ot install that shareware .NET app . . . but I informally suspect this move will drastically help.

Anon
Tuesday, July 06, 2004

I haven't played with the betas.  Which version of the Framework?  1.1?

This might tend to cast 1.1 in concrete as the more (most?) widely deployed desktop version for some time.

Or do you think they'll try to hold SP2's release and push 1.2's to avoid crippling Whidbey for desktop use?

Drudy Mialnam
Tuesday, July 06, 2004

What are you smokin?  Step away from the pipe son.

What are the first two letters in that the name of the service pack?  Let me help you out, they are XP.  Do you know what that stands for?  Neither do I but I know that it's the name of ONE of MS's operating systems.

Now how many of the 'common folk' are running windows xp?  Exactly.  Here's your sign.

You eye-ballin' me boy!?
Tuesday, July 06, 2004

"You eye-ballin' me boy!" - I don't think your argument is valid.

You would think most Windows users would  be on XP by now and if not, they should be seriously thinking about it by now!!!!

Personally I couldn't imagine using anything but XP.

Why is it that Apple doesn't seem to have this issue with OSX and people upgrading to it.

Seems like everyone just picks on Microsoft.......

Gen'xer
Tuesday, July 06, 2004

Yea, that may mean you're just a tad bit ignorant Gen'Xer.

Most of the non-developer audience still runs Win98 or WinME.  All of these grandma's and grandpa's that bought a computer during the boom don't really give a rat's arse about XP SP 2.  They just want to check their damn email and be done with it.

In fact a lot of corporations that I consult for are still running Win98 on their internal networks with maybe a couple of developer machines running WinXP.

You eye-ballin' me boy!?
Tuesday, July 06, 2004

Oh, and that is a big MAYBE.  Have a nice day.

You eye-ballin' me boy!?
Tuesday, July 06, 2004

You eye-ballin' me boy!?

For home users I Can understand, but corporations?

Gotta love this new Economy where "We Are Cheap Bastards" & "IT doesn't Matter"!!!!!!!!!

Don't you find it Ironic how your kids' video game consoles are more powerful & more sophisticated than your company's workstations?????????

Pathetic!!!!!!

Gen'xer
Tuesday, July 06, 2004

"""You would think most Windows users would  be on XP by now ..."""


NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! .


I work for a co. that sells a commercial app targeted to your 'average' home user.

You wouldn't believe the number of people still running 98.

XP is barely a blip in our download stats.


Tuesday, July 06, 2004

It's not that IT doesn't matter or that Corporations are cheap it's that why does a secretary running MS-Word have to have WinXP?  It's all about productivity.

Upgrading to XP forces a chain of events.  The minimum specs for WinXP would force a lot of hardware upgrades.  Since you have new hardware why not run the latest software?  By that time you would have run up a huge bill.  The question asked by most corporations is, 'Would it improve productivity?'  My answer is, 'No for the HR, Accountants, Admin, Secretary etc.. and Yes for the IT.'

When I get a call from a home user, they usually don't want to upgrade because they could care less as long their computer runs the applications they want it to run.  Some of the hardcore gamers upgrade but most people can think of better ways to spend $200 bucks or more because some of these home computers wouldn't even run XP and they would be forced to buy a new computer.

One lady occasionaly contacts me with questions about her 386sx and Windows 3.1.  She swears by it and won't let it go.  The programs she has does what she wants and she knows how to use them.  That's all that matters to her.

You eye-ballin' me boy!?
Tuesday, July 06, 2004

As the original poster, I completely agree . . . everyone is still running commodore and no one has ever heard of Microsoft.

Regardless, to the DEVELOPERS here . . . this is very interesting because the deployment of XP SP2 to our users means the .NET footprint increases . . . you gotta love it. Obviously, it's easier to say you require XP SP2 for its "enhanced security" while being able to slip in our .NET apps.

Anyhow, how many of the DEVELOPERS here are actually privileged (as I am) to TURN DOWN SALES to user's of anything less than Win2K (of course, i'm in the educational market; so operating systems are essentially free to my user's).

Anon
Tuesday, July 06, 2004

>>>> "this is very interesting because the deployment of XP SP2 to our users means the .NET footprint increase"

You're very narrow minded Anon.

You are only fooling yourself.  So you ship your software to some schools and that increases the .NET footprint by how much?  Diddley Squat.

I tell you what.  Here's your sign.  Wear it with pride.

You eye-ballin' me boy!?
Tuesday, July 06, 2004

BTW: Thanks for wasting my tax money by convincing my school to buy your crappy .NET software when it has absolutely no advantage over the previous version and only makes my damn kids go cross eyed playing your stupid math, spelling typing what ever games that you people force onto school districts.

Oh wait you didn't waste my tax money because I told my school district not to buy the shit.

You eye-ballin' me boy!?
Tuesday, July 06, 2004

Hey Anon, disregard this arrogant prick / troll "You eye-ballin' me boy!?" - I Agree with you that the .net framework being included in SP2 is a great help.

It is the "be all to end all"?????? NO.

Does it increase the footprint???? YES!!!!

When my company and others upgrade to XP as a corporate refresh (which many companies will be doing) for all employees (not just IT) it will be a great help.

At least internally we will be able to create .NET WINFORMS apps a lot easier....

Gen'xer
Tuesday, July 06, 2004

You eye-ballin' me boy: Clearly you need better reading comprehension skills.

>So you ship your software to some schools and that increases the .NET footprint by how much? 

What in the world are you talking about?  This isn't about developers shipping software to increase the .NET footprint.  It's about Microsoft increasing the install base of the .NET Framework.  1d 10t

>Thanks for wasting my tax money by convincing my school to buy your crappy .NET software

Education systems get software for a song.  I am working for an educational institution (as a contractor) and Windows XP is less than $20 for these folks.  And the .NET framework is free.  Man, you're a troll and a half.  You bitter, bitter java developer.  Go away.

...
Tuesday, July 06, 2004

when i left my old company of 10,000 or so in January it had:
about 50% on windows 95
30% on 98
15% on 2K
5% XP

josheli
Tuesday, July 06, 2004

"BTW: Thanks for wasting my tax money by convincing my school to buy your crappy .NET software when it has absolutely no advantage over the previous version and only makes my damn kids go cross eyed playing your stupid math, spelling typing what ever games that you people force onto school districts."


Man, you sound like the COBOL programmers I used to work with that resisted CHANGE. Why do we need web applications? Why do we need Object Oriented Programming? Why do we need Windows XP??? BLAH BLAH BLAH

If you want, we could all turn in our XP machines and set up
Commodore PET workstations - it was a simplier time......

Gen'xer
Tuesday, July 06, 2004

First of all, I'm not resisting change and I sure as hell ain't a Java programmer.

The fact is the OP is claiming that he is increasing the footprint of the .NET framework by having it installed on school computers.  Yea ok.  And that helps whom?  No one except yourself and other educational program vendors.  I tell you what.  You figure out a way to upgrade all corporations and home users and then we'll talk.

And yes I do believe most educational software is a huge rip off.  I don't believe kids should have to be entertained constantly in order for them to learn.  And people wonder where ADD comes from.

You eye-ballin' me boy!?
Tuesday, July 06, 2004

"Which version of the Framework?  1.1?"

Question still hasn't been answered.

Also, can anyone else confirm that the .net framework is INDEED included in the XP update?

EVERY version of Windows since 95, I hear developers (wishfully) saying "Oh, that has the {VB 3 |  VB 6 | .net} runtime included.

They would adamantly tell me it was included. And they were wrong everytime.

Is it really included this time. That's a step forward for Microsoft's support of .net.  If THEY are installing it, it gives me a higher comfort level. However, it won't make a big dent in .net availability in the general public.

Mr. Analogy
Tuesday, July 06, 2004

"You figure out a way to upgrade all corporations and home users and then we'll talk."

#1 - All of the flavors of Windows versions before 2000 are end of life on June 30, 2004. OH, they are already end of life!!!!!!!!!! No support.....

#2 - The Old OS's are not going to have all of the security updates that XP & 2000 will continue to get.

#3 - The cost to maintain these older systems > the cost to upgrade to the new technologies......

Windows Roadmap:
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/lifecycle/default.mspx

Gen'xer
Tuesday, July 06, 2004

Yea Gen'Xer you would think the home users would care about those things.  You would think that.  Especially after they invested money in the stuff.

You would also think that a corporate network behind a hardware firewall and an XP gateway would also care.  You would think that.  Especially after they invested money in the stuff.

When you buy a car, do you expect the steering wheel to fall off after 500 miles?  I doubt it.  You see, you invested money in the thing.

Tell my how many home users call MS tech support?  I'd be willing to bet that not very many can or do because of MS's OEM program they have to talk the manufacturer.

Do you think home users invest money in maintaining older computer systems.  You are sadly mistaken.

You eye-ballin' me boy!?
Tuesday, July 06, 2004

"When you buy a car, do you expect the steering wheel to fall off after 500 miles?  I doubt it.  You see, you invested money in the thing."

To go with your analogy:

No, I do not expect the steering wheel to fall off after 500 miles, but like most Americans, I do buy a new car every 3 years.

Gen'xer
Tuesday, July 06, 2004

A quick trip to:
http://www.google.com/press/zeitgeist.html

Shows 50% of ALL users on Windows XP.
That seems a fairly substantial number to me.
Plus, new computers come with it, so there will be a gradual forward crawl even if people don't have the know-how to upgrade their own OS.

Geoff
Tuesday, July 06, 2004

The .NET Framework is *NOT* part of SP2.  I've personally asked on the newsgroups, and during the OEM broadcast they just did a little while ago.

There will be a .NET 1.1 redistributable on the CD distro of the service pack, but it will not be a part of the SP itself.

I think it's stupid that it is not part of the pack.  It's the perfect opportunity to flood the XP market.

Walt
Tuesday, July 06, 2004

"Shows 50% of ALL users on Windows XP."

Really?  Even the ones without an internet connection or those that have never been to google.  Fascinating.

Four out of five dentist's surveyed...  Fully that means 20% of them are dead set against the idea.

Remember 80 pecent of home users are probably behind the technology curve - witness the slump of pc sales.

UNIX
Tuesday, July 06, 2004

"I think it's stupid that it is not part of the pack.  It's the perfect opportunity to flood the XP market."

Gee, dotnet might be fire and motion.  If it is as good as Microsoft said it was, why aren't they pushing it.

.net, the equivalent of MS Bob.
Tuesday, July 06, 2004

.net, the equivalent of MS Bob


Are you serious?

Gen'xer
Tuesday, July 06, 2004

it's certainly not for the home users or MS would be bundling it on every cd they have pressed and it would be a manatory if you wanted vowel keys to work in windows.  It might be the bees knees in small to medium business, but outside of that  niche it is a no show.

.net, the equivalent of MS Bob.
Tuesday, July 06, 2004

.net, the equivalent of MS Bob


Are you serious?

Gen'xer
Tuesday, July 06, 2004

While we're on the topic, does anyone know if XP machines being sold today include the .NET FX?  I know the TabletPC edition does, and I wouldn't be surpirsed if it was on Media Center edition as well, but I am wondering if Microsoft bothered to make it part of the standard install in, say, the post-SP1 timeframe.


Tuesday, July 06, 2004

1.0 is on MCE machines

changing my name in case it wasn't on 2004 and the beta police find me...
Tuesday, July 06, 2004

and the .Net framework is not installed by the XP SP2 RC2, but it is an option "Install .Net Framework" under "Additional Tasks" on the CD-AutoRun application.

changing my name in case it wasn't on 2004 and the beta police find me...
Tuesday, July 06, 2004

i think the same with xp sp1--it's on the cd, but not installed. don't know what version.

mb
Tuesday, July 06, 2004

>> .net, the equivalent of MS Bob

This is a great line.  It has a kernal of truth to it in that .NET doesn't add anything to the user experience.  It's a great software engineering feat, but it's all for developers. 

Gunnar Skogsholm
Wednesday, July 07, 2004

">> .net, the equivalent of MS Bob

This is a great line.  It has a kernal of truth to it in that .NET doesn't add anything to the user experience.  It's a great software engineering feat, but it's all for developers. "

I don't understand your point!!!!!!

When was .net ever marketed to users?????????????????

Sun is doing the same things as .net in Java - web services, SOA, etc etc

How can you bash Microsoft for inventing .net?

It blows away Visual Studio 6 big time - and is a development platform - not a new feature for the users like a popup blocker....

Gen'xer
Wednesday, July 07, 2004

As long as you ALWAYS mention that Microsoft based their .NET framework on the Java VM, I am happy.

Knersus
Tuesday, August 10, 2004

*  Recent Topics

*  Fog Creek Home