WinFX == .NET Framework 3.0
-
Interesting. Nothing changes technically, but it seems kind of awkward to think that 3.0 is simply a superset of 2.0. And now it seems that has Microsoft stopped support for the .NET framework on < Windows XP OSs starting with v3.0. http://blogs.msdn.com/somasegar/archive/2006/06/09/624300.aspx[^] Charlie if(!curlies){ return; }
We can be only lucky that the ".NET Framework 3.0" as they call it :-) will support windows XP and 2003. BTW: there was a lot of confusions with the name. Once they called the whole thing "WinFX 3.0", so I think that .NET Framework 3.0 makes more sense.. Even though .NET 3 is only .NET 2 with some more libraries... :)
Tomas Petricek (Microsoft C# MVP)
www.eeeksoft.net | Photos | ASP.NET Multi-column layout control -
Interesting. Nothing changes technically, but it seems kind of awkward to think that 3.0 is simply a superset of 2.0. And now it seems that has Microsoft stopped support for the .NET framework on < Windows XP OSs starting with v3.0. http://blogs.msdn.com/somasegar/archive/2006/06/09/624300.aspx[^] Charlie if(!curlies){ return; }
back in my day, you had DOS 3 and you liked it! (well, you didn't like it, but there it was anyway) Cleek | Image Toolkits | Thumbnail maker
-
We can be only lucky that the ".NET Framework 3.0" as they call it :-) will support windows XP and 2003. BTW: there was a lot of confusions with the name. Once they called the whole thing "WinFX 3.0", so I think that .NET Framework 3.0 makes more sense.. Even though .NET 3 is only .NET 2 with some more libraries... :)
Tomas Petricek (Microsoft C# MVP)
www.eeeksoft.net | Photos | ASP.NET Multi-column layout controlTomas Petricek wrote:
Even though .NET 3 is only .NET 2 with some more libraries...
To me that makes it even more confusing! I think I prefer WinFX! Kevin
-
Interesting. Nothing changes technically, but it seems kind of awkward to think that 3.0 is simply a superset of 2.0. And now it seems that has Microsoft stopped support for the .NET framework on < Windows XP OSs starting with v3.0. http://blogs.msdn.com/somasegar/archive/2006/06/09/624300.aspx[^] Charlie if(!curlies){ return; }
What I don't get is, does this mean that Orcas will ship before Vista ( no way ) or Orcas will ship with .NET 4.0 and .NET 3.0 will be a release without an IDE, that is it just plugs in to VS2005 ? WinFX always had no support < XP SP2. And were does LINQ come into it ? Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++
-
What I don't get is, does this mean that Orcas will ship before Vista ( no way ) or Orcas will ship with .NET 4.0 and .NET 3.0 will be a release without an IDE, that is it just plugs in to VS2005 ? WinFX always had no support < XP SP2. And were does LINQ come into it ? Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++
Yeah, all the version numbers start to separate from each other, I think. Up till now, the CLR, the libraries and the compilers have all been on the same release schedule, but I guess that's out the window now. It's kind of funny, because they say they made this move to "reduce confusion", but this seems more convoluted. It's like the release of VS2005, when they said "we're dividing the functionality between 17 different version to simply the choices for our customers." Charlie if(!curlies){ return; }
-
Interesting. Nothing changes technically, but it seems kind of awkward to think that 3.0 is simply a superset of 2.0. And now it seems that has Microsoft stopped support for the .NET framework on < Windows XP OSs starting with v3.0. http://blogs.msdn.com/somasegar/archive/2006/06/09/624300.aspx[^] Charlie if(!curlies){ return; }
Charlie Williams wrote:
Interesting. Nothing changes technically, but it seems kind of awkward to think that 3.0 is simply a superset of 2.0. And now it seems that has Microsoft stopped support for the .NET framework on < Windows XP OSs starting with v3.0.
*shrug* I didn't get that from the blog, but I guess your ymmv.
“Profanity is the attempt of a lazy and feeble mind to express itself forcefully”
-
Interesting. Nothing changes technically, but it seems kind of awkward to think that 3.0 is simply a superset of 2.0. And now it seems that has Microsoft stopped support for the .NET framework on < Windows XP OSs starting with v3.0. http://blogs.msdn.com/somasegar/archive/2006/06/09/624300.aspx[^] Charlie if(!curlies){ return; }
In comments: "Yes - The CLR is still v2.0." And they claimed .NET got rid of DLL hell.:laugh: As for dumping pre-XP. It's about time. Anyone who thinks he has a better idea of what's good for people than people do is a swine. - P.J. O'Rourke
-
Interesting. Nothing changes technically, but it seems kind of awkward to think that 3.0 is simply a superset of 2.0. And now it seems that has Microsoft stopped support for the .NET framework on < Windows XP OSs starting with v3.0. http://blogs.msdn.com/somasegar/archive/2006/06/09/624300.aspx[^] Charlie if(!curlies){ return; }
Charlie Williams wrote:
but it seems kind of awkward to think that 3.0 is simply a superset of 2.0
Why is it awkward. WinFX was always a superset comprised of the .NET Framework 2.0, WPF, WCF, WF and InfoCard. Therefore, it was decided that a name change wasn't necessary and only created confusion. Hit & Run Poster Warning: If you want me to reply, you'll need to email me directly as I rarely have time to continually check back for responses. Tom Archer (blog) Program Manager - Windows SDK Tools MICROSOFT
-
Charlie Williams wrote:
but it seems kind of awkward to think that 3.0 is simply a superset of 2.0
Why is it awkward. WinFX was always a superset comprised of the .NET Framework 2.0, WPF, WCF, WF and InfoCard. Therefore, it was decided that a name change wasn't necessary and only created confusion. Hit & Run Poster Warning: If you want me to reply, you'll need to email me directly as I rarely have time to continually check back for responses. Tom Archer (blog) Program Manager - Windows SDK Tools MICROSOFT
Tom Archer - MSFT wrote:
WinFX was always a superset comprised of the .NET Framework 2.0, WPF, WCF, WF and InfoCard.
WinFX was a set of libraries that ran on the .NET Framework 2.0. WinFX has never contained the framework, so how was it a superset? Anyway, read the comments on the relevent blogs. The claim that this was a move to reduce confusion is rediculous. You've now separated the versioning for the library, the compilers, and the CLR and put them all under one framework version. How on earth could that be less confusing than the existing system? [EDIT]By the way, nice attempt on the spin, but it doesn't fly.
Therefore, it was decided that a name change wasn't necessary and only created confusion.
i.e., We didn't change the name. We simply stopped an eroneous and confusing name-change from taking place. You're welcome." [/EDIT]
Last modified: Saturday, June 10, 2006 11:52:58 AM --
-
Charlie Williams wrote:
Interesting. Nothing changes technically, but it seems kind of awkward to think that 3.0 is simply a superset of 2.0. And now it seems that has Microsoft stopped support for the .NET framework on < Windows XP OSs starting with v3.0.
*shrug* I didn't get that from the blog, but I guess your ymmv.
“Profanity is the attempt of a lazy and feeble mind to express itself forcefully”
Jerry Hammond wrote:
I didn't get that from the blog, but I guess your ymmv.
Which part? If the .NET fraomework v3.0 contains WinFX components, it will not run on Windows versions prior to XP. It has been said from the beginning that WPF, WCF, WF, and the like will only be packported to Windows XP and Windows Server 2003.