Thank you, DalePres.
I'd imagine that the "rules that we ask of all Microsoft
community members" apply to *all* community members,
don't they ?
Bob got the information he needed and,
in response, sent a biting reply.
I replied with a bit of satire to his incorrect "inference".
[color=blue][color=green]
>> Maybe, if you *need* .NET 2.0 and VS.NET 2005,
>> you might squeak by with .NET 1.1 and VS.NET 2003.[/color][/color]
That was not "discourteous", nor "unprofessional",
nor did it violate any MVP "code of conduct", as you allege.
And, yes, I *am* "passionate about sharing
my knowledge and experience with others."
Bob asked whether he could use VS NET 2003 and .NET 1.1,
and I told him that he *needs* .NET 2.0 and VS.NET 2005.
If he, or you, misunderstood my reply, I'm sorry.
I find your current reply to be unwarranted and an overreaction.
Reply what you will, as is your right,
if you think you need to make your point clearer.
I won't be replying any more to this thread.
Juan T. Llibre
ASP.NET MVP
http://asp.net.do/foros/
Foros de ASP.NET en Español
=====================
"DalePres" <don-t-spa-m-me@lea-ve-me-a-lone--.com> wrote in message
news:OauJEX%23CFHA.464@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...[color=blue]
> Just thought you may have forgotten...
>
> From the MVP FAQ page:
>
> Because the MVP Award is an award-based program with criteria based on
> past contributions, Microsoft has no expectations of MVPs beyond the
> expectations of courtesy, professionalism, code of conduct and adherence
> to the community rules that we ask of all Microsoft community members.
>
> and:
>
> Inspired community, Inspiring people. MVPs are dedicated professionals,
> passionate about sharing their knowledge and experience with others.
>
> DalePres[/color]
[color=blue]
> "Juan T. Llibre" <nomailreplies@nowhere.com> wrote in message
> news:%23cfH7P9CFHA.3504@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...[color=green]
>> Yes, Bob.
>>
>> You asked if you could use VS NET 2003 and .NET 1.1,
>> and I told you that you *need* .NET 2.0 and VS.NET 2005.
>>
>> re:[color=darkred]
>>> I will infer from that almost response
>>> that the answer to my question is no[/color]
>>
>> Be careful.
>> You might not want to make inferences of that magnitude.
>>
>> Maybe, if you *need* .NET 2.0 and VS.NET 2005,
>> you might squeak by with .NET 1.1 and VS.NET 2003.
>>
>> re:[color=darkred]
>>> the question of course actually being 'can I use[/color]
>> the 1.1 framework on my 64 bit machine"
>>
>> And the answer you got is : you *need* VS.NET 2005,
>> and you *need* the 64-bit version of .NET 2.0 listed
>> at the link sent.
>>
>> You can't even *install* .NET 1.1 on 64-bit systems,
>> as you painfully found out.
>>
>> Sorry if you expected a different answer, or you think
>> that the answer you were given was "hazarded".
>>
>> It was quite precise.
>>
>> In sum, I sent you a link to a page titled
>> "64-Bit .NET Framework Development Tools".
>>
>>
http://msdn.microsoft.com/netframewo...4bit/devtools/
>>
>> The tools with which you can do 64-bit .NET
>> development are listed at that very same page.
>>
>> Take some time to read through the link sent,
>> and the other links on that page, if you are interested
>> in 64-bit .NET development, as you apparently are.
>>
>> The rest of the answers/links you need are at that page.
>>
>> Juan T. Llibre
>> ASP.NET MVP
>>
http://asp.net.do/foros/
>> Foros de ASP.NET en Español
>> =====================[/color][/color]
[color=blue][color=green]
>> "Bob" <Bob@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:00F6DF43-24DF-4FCB-90DA-FF8F4D38FFF7@microsoft.com...[color=darkred]
>>> So you sent me a link to the 2.0 framework. I will infer from that
>>> almost
>>> response that the answer to my question is no, the question of course
>>> actually being 'can I use the 1.1 framework on my 64 bit machine'. I was
>>> assuming that being Windows 2003, even the 64 bit version, that I would
>>> have
>>> support for my 1.1 apps recompiled in 64 bit or run through WoW. Thank
>>> you
>>> for at least hazarding a reply though.
>>>
>>> "Juan T. Llibre" wrote:
>>>
>>>> You know what *I* found curious, Bob ?
>>>>
>>>> I found the answer to your question in less than
>>>> 2 minutes of browsing msdn.microsoft.com :
>>>>
>>>> All I did was search MSDN for
>>>> "64-Bit .NET Framework Development"
>>>> and the very first link in the returned list was :
>>>>
>>>>
http://msdn.microsoft.com/netframewo...4bit/devtools/
>>>>
>>>> You need the 64-bit .NET Framework SDK and Visual Studio 2005.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Juan T. Llibre
>>>> ASP.NET MVP
>>>>
http://asp.net.do/foros/
>>>> Foros de ASP.NET en Español
>>>> =====================
>>>>
>>>> "Bob" <Bob@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:F47A339E-2284-471F-993B-D31573DE02A3@microsoft.com...
>>>> > Yo uknow what I find curious here? I am supposed to get an answer
>>>> > within
>>>> > 72
>>>> > hours as an MSDN subscriber posting in the Managed Newsgroups. I
>>>> > posted
>>>> > this
>>>> > 2 months ago. Thank you Microsoft for you usual level of support.
>>>> >
>>>> > "Bob" wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >> Is ASP.NET 1.1 available on the 64 bit extended version of Windows
>>>> >> 2003
>>>> >> Server? When I install VS.NET 2003 I then get Service Unavailable
>>>> >> from
>>>> >> IIS
>>>> >> when navigating to the main under construction site
>>>> >> (
http://localhost)
>>>> >> and I
>>>> >> get error 'HTTP/1.1 503 Service Unavailable' when trying to start a
>>>> >> new
>>>> >> ASP.NET project. I uninstalled IIS and reinstalled IIS, and the
>>>> >> under
>>>> >> construction default page comes up normally, I ran aspnet_regiis -i
>>>> >> and then get the same service unavailable error. I get the following
>>>> >> errors in the event log.[/color][/color][/color]
