.Net 1.1 versus .Net 2.0

[RobinS]

I am working at a company that is going to publish a product on the market.
The code is currently in .Net 1.1. The developers would like to migrate it
to .Net 2.0.

Management has concerns about users having to install the .Net framework
before using the product. They want to "minimize any barriers to
acceptance".

If .Net 1.1 and .Net 2.0 both require a reboot, then that issue is moot,
unless a lot more people have .Net 1.1 installed.

Does anybody know of any statistics or numbers out there that show the
number of installations of either or both .Net framework versions? And
maybe some kind of number of computers?

Because if .Net 1.1 is only installed on 1% of computers, that's one thing;
if it's installed on 20%, that's a more compelling reason to stay with 1.1.

Can you think of any compelling reasons I can present to management to
choose .Net 2.0 over .Net 1.1?

Barring that, I understand there is some kind of plug-in I can use with
VS2005 that will allow me to develop .Net 1.1 code -- is that right? Anyone
know where it is?

I would appreciate any help or advice you can give me here.

Thanks,
Robin S.

[Jim Rand]

Hi Robin,

I'm just going to live with it for now.

At a recent MSDN roadshow I asked one of the presenters if VS 2005 runs
faster on Vista as his system didn't seem to suffer the same performance
issues. He smiled and said that one of the benefits of working for
Microsoft is he gets really fast computers - in this case a dual-core
processor coupled with 4 gigs of memory.

The only major issues that I have with VS 2005 are:

1) The form designer performance. The rest of the time while working in
the code, performance is ok.
2) The dataset designer and the SQL code it generates. That was so bad
that I rolled my own in MS Access which allows me to do in minutes what is
impossible with the xsd designer.

Next year should be great - a new machine, Windows Vista, and VS 2008 with
the kinks worked out.

Jim

[RobinS]

"Jim Rand" <ji*****@ix.netcom.comwrote in message
news:um**************@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...

Hi Robin,

I'm just going to live with it for now.

At a recent MSDN roadshow I asked one of the presenters if VS 2005 runs
faster on Vista as his system didn't seem to suffer the same performance
issues. He smiled and said that one of the benefits of working for
Microsoft is he gets really fast computers - in this case a dual-core
processor coupled with 4 gigs of memory.

The only major issues that I have with VS 2005 are:

1) The form designer performance. The rest of the time while working in
the code, performance is ok.

I think upgrading to SP1 helped this problem.

2) The dataset designer and the SQL code it generates. That was so bad
that I rolled my own in MS Access which allows me to do in minutes what
is impossible with the xsd designer.

I mucked around and wrote something that would generate the strongly typed
dataset w/o the table adapters, but haven't actually had time to implement
it yet.

Next year should be great - a new machine, Windows Vista, and VS 2008
with the kinks worked out.

Jim

VS 2008 with the kinks worked out.

LOL. You're such an optimist. :-D

Robin S.

[Susie DBA [MSFT]]

I DISAGREE WITH THIS:

Plus, any NEW computer comes / ships with .net 2.0 framework...that
should
be proof in-itself that you should be using 2.0 framework. Try to
draw a
line for your CEO showing the planned path of Microsoft and they
support and
upgrade paths ... show him or her how 1.1 goes and 2.0 goes...
On Mar 29, 6:51 am, "jeff" <jhersey at allnorth dottt comwrote:

and there in lies your arguement with the CEO ...

CEO's should be concerned with one thing .. supplying those that do the work
with the appropriate tools and work environment. period. I know this may
sound ridiculas ... but who came first the software or the CEO ...

If you want to produce state-of-the-art technology or best of the bread
software (terms CEO's understand) - you cannot restrict your developers to
OLDER technologies simply because they have some preconceived idea that if a
user has to reboot they won't want your product!!! Get proof that user's
hate to reboot after installing your software ... I am sorry, but if your
software is that good ... the CEO and User will not care if they have to
reboot after install. If your CEO is bent on 'if the user needs to reboot,
use a lesser technology' , then you have a very strong case for VB6 ...
'cause you can be certain that they user will not need to reboot...

As far as reboot after .net2 framework is installed, this is not the case -
I just released a new application to a client with over 50 desktops (all of
which needed the .net 2 framework) and they did not have to reboot once...

So, before you go down any path, I would strongly recommend that you test
the install of the various .net framework's in all situations...so you can
say for sure what is happening ... and what will be required by your
potential 'general public' customers.

I bet if you made a business case as to why you want .net2 framework (added
functionality, added productivity, added features ...) you would not be
having this discussion with your 'paycheck' signature.

Plus, any NEW computer comes / ships with .net 2.0 framework...that should
be proof in-itself that you should be using 2.0 framework. Try to draw a
line for your CEO showing the planned path of Microsoft and they support and
upgrade paths ... show him or her how 1.1 goes and 2.0 goes...

I just cannot believe that a CEO is making such a technical decision that
ultimately impact the future of the product, based on the fact of a single
reboot!!! WOW !!! get off the boat now !!!

Jeff.

PS: your CEO probably believes that 10 'junior' - dime a dozen - programmers
writing 10,000 lines of code each are better than 2 'seasoned' - hard to
find, easy to retain if kept interested and viod of decision as mentioned -
programmers writing 5,000 lines of code each! More lines code = better
product ... or this maybe your managers 'yard stick' for evaluating you and
your peers.

Good luck.

"Smokey Grindel" <[e-mail] in message

news:eF**************@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...

Just to let you know, if you deploy to vista machines .NET 2.0 is
installed there by default! which is nice for once to finally have it
installed by default

"RobinS" <[e-mail] in message
news:Os******************************@comcast.com. ..

I am working at a company that is going to publish a product on the
market. The code is currently in .Net 1.1. The developers would like to
migrate it to .Net 2.0.

Management has concerns about users having to install the .Net framework
before using the product. They want to "minimize any barriers to
acceptance".

If .Net 1.1 and .Net 2.0 both require a reboot, then that issue is moot,
unless a lot more people have .Net 1.1 installed.

Does anybody know of any statistics or numbers out there that show the
number of installations of either or both .Net framework versions? And
maybe some kind of number of computers?

Because if .Net 1.1 is only installed on 1% of computers, that's one
thing; if it's installed on 20%, that's a more compelling reason to stay
with 1.1.

Can you think of any compelling reasons I can present to management to
choose .Net 2.0 over .Net 1.1?

Barring that, I understand there is some kind of plug-in I can use with
VS2005 that will allow me to develop .Net 1.1 code -- is that right?
Anyone know where it is?

I would appreciate any help or advice you can give me here.

Thanks,
Robin S.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

[Susie DBA [MSFT]]

Andy

lick it; cornholer


On Mar 30, 8:06 am, "Andy" <[e-mail]:

On Mar 30, 10:49 am, "Chris Dunaway" <[e-mail]:

.Net 3.0 *is* .Net 2.0 with some extra assemblies added to support WF,
WPF, and WCF. The .Net 2.0 Assemblies have not changed. They are the
same.

Its probably best to ignore posts from Susie DBA [MSFT], as she seems
to be a known troll.

[Susie DBA [MSFT]]

Robin;

other than the FACT that I accomplish more than you do...

and you spend all your time figuring out why .NET runs like crap and
why it's not on any machines

other than THOSE TWO FACTS; you might have a point

as it is; I will fight M$ and .NET with all of my fury until they
start releasing POLISHED, TESTED PRODUCTS THAT ARE STABLE AND MORE
FUNCTIONAL THAN THEIR PREDESSORS.

On Mar 30, 6:30 pm, "RobinS" <[e-mail]:

"Chris Dunaway" <[e-mail] in message

news:11**********************@n76g2000hsh.googlegr oups.com...

On Mar 30, 10:06 am, "Andy" <[e-mail]:

On Mar 30, 10:49 am, "Chris Dunaway" <[e-mail]:

.Net 3.0 *is* .Net 2.0 with some extra assemblies added to support WF,
WPF, and WCF. The .Net 2.0 Assemblies have not changed. They are the
same.

Its probably best to ignore posts from Susie DBA [MSFT], as she seems
to be a known troll.

Yes, I am aware of that, but I optimistically tend to give people the
benefit of the doubt. In this case, I didn't want Susie's post to
confuse anyone else.

Chris

That's a good reason to respond to the troll. About the only reason I can
think of, too.

Robin S.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

[Ravichandran J.V.]

It may not be just the stats that should rule your mind here; there may
also be sufficient new features in 2.0 that may help in convincing your
management. For instance, enhanced security, generic implementations
etc. But, if you mean that the management is not interested in technical
reasons but that which has direct business impact/value then yes, some
sort of usage stats may be what you require. This you could obtain only
from management consultants who can perform a survey and return you the
result. This would be a commercial venture that you may need to
undertake with the management consultant.

with regards,
J.V.Ravichandran
- http://www.geocities.com/
jvravichandran
- Or, just search on "J.V.Ravichandran"
at http://www.Google.com

*** Sent via Developersdex http://www.developersdex.com ***

[Bruce W. Darby]

Robin,

This year my company deployed a .Net 1.1 app in asp.net. I've installed the
application on over 30 computers and have not had to restart the computer
once for the .Net stuff. The only thing that caused me to have to reboot the
machine is if the user had not updated their MDAC components.

Bruce

"RobinS" <Ro****@NoSpam.yah.nonewrote in message
news:ML******************************@comcast.com. ..

>
"Jim Rand" <ji*****@ix.netcom.comwrote in message
news:um**************@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...

>Hi Robin,

I'm just going to live with it for now.

At a recent MSDN roadshow I asked one of the presenters if VS 2005 runs
faster on Vista as his system didn't seem to suffer the same performance
issues. He smiled and said that one of the benefits of working for
Microsoft is he gets really fast computers - in this case a dual-core
processor coupled with 4 gigs of memory.

The only major issues that I have with VS 2005 are:

1) The form designer performance. The rest of the time while working in
the code, performance is ok.

I think upgrading to SP1 helped this problem.

> 2) The dataset designer and the SQL code it generates. That was so bad
that I rolled my own in MS Access which allows me to do in minutes what
is impossible with the xsd designer.

I mucked around and wrote something that would generate the strongly typed
dataset w/o the table adapters, but haven't actually had time to implement
it yet.

>Next year should be great - a new machine, Windows Vista, and VS 2008
with the kinks worked out.

Jim

>VS 2008 with the kinks worked out.

LOL. You're such an optimist. :-D

Robin S.

[RobinS]

Thanks, but I was looking for information that would support .Net 2.0, not
1.1. :-(

As it turns out, you don't have to reboot after installing .Net 2.0,
either.

Oh, and by the way, .Net 1.1 is not included in Windows Vista.

Thanks anyway.
Robin S.
------------------------------------------
"Bruce W. Darby" <kr******@atcomcast.netwrote in message
news:Os******************************@comcast.com. ..

Robin,

This year my company deployed a .Net 1.1 app in asp.net. I've installed
the application on over 30 computers and have not had to restart the
computer once for the .Net stuff. The only thing that caused me to have
to reboot the machine is if the user had not updated their MDAC
components.

Bruce

"RobinS" <Ro****@NoSpam.yah.nonewrote in message
news:ML******************************@comcast.com. ..

>>
"Jim Rand" <ji*****@ix.netcom.comwrote in message
news:um**************@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...

>>Hi Robin,

I'm just going to live with it for now.

At a recent MSDN roadshow I asked one of the presenters if VS 2005 runs
faster on Vista as his system didn't seem to suffer the same
performance issues. He smiled and said that one of the benefits of
working for Microsoft is he gets really fast computers - in this case a
dual-core processor coupled with 4 gigs of memory.

The only major issues that I have with VS 2005 are:

1) The form designer performance. The rest of the time while working
in the code, performance is ok.

I think upgrading to SP1 helped this problem.

>> 2) The dataset designer and the SQL code it generates. That was so
bad that I rolled my own in MS Access which allows me to do in minutes
what is impossible with the xsd designer.

I mucked around and wrote something that would generate the strongly
typed dataset w/o the table adapters, but haven't actually had time to
implement it yet.

>>Next year should be great - a new machine, Windows Vista, and VS 2008
with the kinks worked out.

Jim

>>VS 2008 with the kinks worked out.

LOL. You're such an optimist. :-D

Robin S.

[Bruce W. Darby]

I know, but for the most part, I was just hoping what little information I
could provide you would be in the smallest way useful. :) Hope you were able
to convince them.

Bruce
"RobinS" <Ro****@NoSpam.yah.nonewrote in message
news:HL******************************@comcast.com. ..

Thanks, but I was looking for information that would support .Net 2.0, not
1.1. :-(

As it turns out, you don't have to reboot after installing .Net 2.0,
either.

Oh, and by the way, .Net 1.1 is not included in Windows Vista.

Thanks anyway.
Robin S.
------------------------------------------
"Bruce W. Darby" <kr******@atcomcast.netwrote in message
news:Os******************************@comcast.com. ..

>Robin,

This year my company deployed a .Net 1.1 app in asp.net. I've installed
the application on over 30 computers and have not had to restart the
computer once for the .Net stuff. The only thing that caused me to have
to reboot the machine is if the user had not updated their MDAC
components.

Bruce

"RobinS" <Ro****@NoSpam.yah.nonewrote in message
news:ML******************************@comcast.com ...

>>>
"Jim Rand" <ji*****@ix.netcom.comwrote in message
news:um**************@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
Hi Robin,

I'm just going to live with it for now.

At a recent MSDN roadshow I asked one of the presenters if VS 2005 runs
faster on Vista as his system didn't seem to suffer the same
performance issues. He smiled and said that one of the benefits of
working for Microsoft is he gets really fast computers - in this case a
dual-core processor coupled with 4 gigs of memory.

The only major issues that I have with VS 2005 are:

1) The form designer performance. The rest of the time while working
in the code, performance is ok.

I think upgrading to SP1 helped this problem.

2) The dataset designer and the SQL code it generates. That was so
bad that I rolled my own in MS Access which allows me to do in minutes
what is impossible with the xsd designer.

I mucked around and wrote something that would generate the strongly
typed dataset w/o the table adapters, but haven't actually had time to
implement it yet.

Next year should be great - a new machine, Windows Vista, and VS 2008
with the kinks worked out.

Jim


VS 2008 with the kinks worked out.

LOL. You're such an optimist. :-D

Robin S.

[RobinS]

The jury is still out, but I'm hopeful. Here are the reasons, in case
anyone else wants to see them. I got some of the numbers from the web, and
some from a friend who works at MSFT.

1) Internationalization has a lot of new and helpful stuff in .Net 2.0. For
one thing, the resource manager handles not just strings, but bitmaps,
images, audio, etc. For another, the TableLayoutPanel and FlowLayoutPanel
can help with the resizing of the form because of the differences in the
length of strings. (More controls support the AutoSize property, too). .Net
2.0 supports Arabic and Hebrew, and has properties to help internationalize
currency names and handle right-to-left languages.

2) When you deploy the .Net 1.1 framework, if you want the installation
script to be in the local language, you must deploy that version of the
framework. For .Net 2.0, they are all included in the same version.

3) ClickOnce deployment is only available in .Net 2.0, which they can use
to deploy their app and handle incremental updates.

4) More than 90% of the computers sold in 2006 had the .Net 2.0 framework
installed. It was included in the Windows XP Media Center edition shipped
to millions of consumers in 2005 and 2006. It was also included in the
Windows XP Tablet Edition.

5) All versions of Windows Vista have .Net 2.0 installed. According to
MSFT, over 20 million copies of Vista were sold in the first two months
after its launch.

6) Windows Vista does *not* have .Net 1.1 installed.

7) The .Net 2.0 Framework is included in many of MSFT's own products, like
Encarta, the new Expression products, Windows Live OneCare, and of course
Visual Studio 2005.

8) The adoption of .Net 2.0 was much higher in its initial phases than .Net
1.1, and is spreading substantially faster than .Net 1.1 did.
And some general info about .Net proliferation (not version-specific) for
anyone who's interested:

* Software built by MSFT partners and MSFT itself is responsible for the
..Net Framework being installed on over 200 million systems worldwide. .Net
software runs in 95% of the Global 1000.

* For custom-developed apps, 44% of respondents in the US use the .Net
development platform.

* The vast majority of Windows XP machines in the US have the .Net
Framework installed.

* More than 65% of Windows XP computers worldwide have the .Net Framework
installed.

* MSFT estimates that about 500M PCs worldwide have some version of the
..Net Framework installed.

So that's what I found out. The most interesting stuff (to me) was the
internationalization capabilities.

Robin S.
-----------------------------
"Bruce W. Darby" <kr******@atcomcast.netwrote in message
news:9p******************************@comcast.com. ..

>I know, but for the most part, I was just hoping what little information I
could provide you would be in the smallest way useful. :) Hope you were
able to convince them.

Bruce
"RobinS" <Ro****@NoSpam.yah.nonewrote in message
news:HL******************************@comcast.com. ..

>Thanks, but I was looking for information that would support .Net 2.0,
not 1.1. :-(

As it turns out, you don't have to reboot after installing .Net 2.0,
either.

Oh, and by the way, .Net 1.1 is not included in Windows Vista.

Thanks anyway.
Robin S.
------------------------------------------
"Bruce W. Darby" <kr******@atcomcast.netwrote in message
news:Os******************************@comcast.com ...

>>Robin,

This year my company deployed a .Net 1.1 app in asp.net. I've installed
the application on over 30 computers and have not had to restart the
computer once for the .Net stuff. The only thing that caused me to have
to reboot the machine is if the user had not updated their MDAC
components.

Bruce

"RobinS" <Ro****@NoSpam.yah.nonewrote in message
news:ML******************************@comcast.co m...

"Jim Rand" <ji*****@ix.netcom.comwrote in message
news:um**************@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
Hi Robin,
>
I'm just going to live with it for now.
>
At a recent MSDN roadshow I asked one of the presenters if VS 2005
runs faster on Vista as his system didn't seem to suffer the same
performance issues. He smiled and said that one of the benefits of
working for Microsoft is he gets really fast computers - in this case
a dual-core processor coupled with 4 gigs of memory.
>
The only major issues that I have with VS 2005 are:
>
1) The form designer performance. The rest of the time while working
in the code, performance is ok.

I think upgrading to SP1 helped this problem.

2) The dataset designer and the SQL code it generates. That was so
bad that I rolled my own in MS Access which allows me to do in
minutes what is impossible with the xsd designer.

I mucked around and wrote something that would generate the strongly
typed dataset w/o the table adapters, but haven't actually had time to
implement it yet.

Next year should be great - a new machine, Windows Vista, and VS 2008
with the kinks worked out.
>
Jim
>

VS 2008 with the kinks worked out.

LOL. You're such an optimist. :-D

Robin S.

[Susie DBA [MSFT]]

DUDE it is NOT called .NET 3.0.. it is called .NET 2.0 with 3.0
extensions or something godddamn ridiculous

MS needs to stop pulling strategy out of a cracker jax box

BRING BACK VB AND DROP THESE STUPID NEWSGROUP NAMES
it's not called VB DOTNET, WHY AM I IN A NEWSGROUP CALLED DOTNOT?

On Mar 29, 5:24 am, "Andy" <[e-mail]:

On Mar 28, 6:14 pm, Peter Bromley <[e-mail]:

RobinS wrote:

Can you think of any compelling reasons I can present to management to
choose .Net 2.0 over .Net 1.1?

Vista ships with .NET 2.0, so over time more users will already have
.NET 2.0.

FYI, our product is in the same position, developed with 1.1 and VS2003.
We support either 1.1 or 2.0 and install 2.0 if neither version is
installed. No reboot required.

Cheers,

Vista ships with .Net 3.0 actually..

[Susie DBA [MSFT]]

it's not that big of a deal?

a) it's impossible to determine which version of the framework is on a
particular machine
b) 100 mb download _IS_ a big deal
c) forced upgrade = Vista can suck my dick


On Mar 28, 8:46 pm, "Luc The Perverse"
<[e-mail]:

"Susie DBA [MSFT]" <[e-mail] in messagenews:11**********************@e65g2000hsc.g ooglegroups.com...

well if Microsoft can't get the frameworks on EVERY MACHINE EVERYWHERE
then they just need to go back to Vb6

I swear to god; clientside deployment of the framework is the ONLY
reason I'm such an asshole when it comes to .NET

more importantly-- is 1.0 / 1.1 _REQUIRED_ for XP SP2?

I wish I would have known that; I've always had the worst time trying
to figure out what version of the framework is on a particular machine

if the WINVER / Proxy Command string is right-- I can't wait to look
it up in the proxy logs i've got @Home

Bundle your installations with a .NET framework. It's not that big of a
deal.

If it bothers you so much you could write your apps in assembly language/old
windows SDK.

BTW - don't top post.

Microsoft ~HAS~ a forced upgrade strategy. It is called Vista - they are
working on it.

--
LTP

:)

[Susie DBA [MSFT]]

I heard that MS is going to surrender and give a native VB compilation
option

I can't wait to see it in the next CTP of Orcas!
-Susie


On Mar 28, 2:16 pm, "RobinS" <[e-mail]:

I don't know they have 1.1 installed. This is a product for the general
public. The question is if anybody knows how many of the general public
have any version of the .Net framework installed, and if they know the
distribution.

Robin S.
--------------------------"Bob Milton" <[e-mail] in message

news:ux**************@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...

Robin,
How do you know any of your customers have 1.1 installed? That is not
a given, except for Server 2003. While 1.1 is in SP2 of XP, it was NOT
automatically installed. If you don't want to install anything else ever,
don't use .NET (or java for that matter).
Bob
"RobinS" <[e-mail] in message
news:6u******************************@comcast.com. ..

To address the responses that say downloading and rebooting would not
discourage you, I share this piece of information: The other developers
on my team say it would discourage them, and (more importantly), the CEO
of the company agrees. Any guesses on who signs my checks?

So arguing the case about whether rebooting would be a discouragement
isn't getting me anywhere. Been there, tried that. :-(

Robin S.
------------------------------------
"RobinS" <[e-mail] in message
news:Os******************************@comcast.com ...

>I am working at a company that is going to publish a product on the
market. The code is currently in .Net 1.1. The developers would like to
migrate it to .Net 2.0.

>Management has concerns about users having to install the .Net
framework before using the product. They want to "minimize any barriers
to acceptance".

>If .Net 1.1 and .Net 2.0 both require a reboot, then that issue is
moot, unless a lot more people have .Net 1.1 installed.

>Does anybody know of any statistics or numbers out there that show the
number of installations of either or both .Net framework versions? And
maybe some kind of number of computers?

>Because if .Net 1.1 is only installed on 1% of computers, that's one
thing; if it's installed on 20%, that's a more compelling reason to
stay with 1.1.

>Can you think of any compelling reasons I can present to management to
choose .Net 2.0 over .Net 1.1?

>Barring that, I understand there is some kind of plug-in I can use with
VS2005 that will allow me to develop .Net 1.1 code -- is that right?
Anyone know where it is?

>I would appreciate any help or advice you can give me here.

>Thanks,
Robin S.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

[Susie DBA [MSFT]]

I think that anyone causing a reboot for anything should be forbidden

if someone makes me reboot? they can screw themselves

you kids just have no clue how many machines I have.. and until MS
releases SMS Home Edition, I'm not going to run around installing 200
mb patches on all of my machines

and 'its comign on vista' is a stupid fucknig argument

vb6 runtime is on every copy of windows ever since what.. windows 95?

FuK .NOT


On Mar 28, 11:28 am, "Luc The Perverse"
<[e-mail]:

"RobinS" <[e-mail] in message

news:Os******************************@comcast.com. ..

I am working at a company that is going to publish a product on the
market. The code is currently in .Net 1.1. The developers would like to
migrate it to .Net 2.0.

Management has concerns about users having to install the .Net framework
before using the product. They want to "minimize any barriers to
acceptance".

If .Net 1.1 and .Net 2.0 both require a reboot, then that issue is moot,
unless a lot more people have .Net 1.1 installed.

Does anybody know of any statistics or numbers out there that show the
number of installations of either or both .Net framework versions? And
maybe some kind of number of computers?

Because if .Net 1.1 is only installed on 1% of computers, that's one
thing; if it's installed on 20%, that's a more compelling reason to stay
with 1.1.

Can you think of any compelling reasons I can present to management to
choose .Net 2.0 over .Net 1.1?

Barring that, I understand there is some kind of plug-in I can use with
VS2005 that will allow me to develop .Net 1.1 code -- is that right?
Anyone know where it is?

I would appreciate any help or advice you can give me here.

I have never in my life run an installation package and decided to uninstall
it because it required a reboot.

Download size is understandable - but you have an install program anyway.

Unless you are writing a virus, I don't think you should need to worry about
it ;)

--
LTP

:)- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

[Luc The Perverse]

"Susie DBA [MSFT]" <su******@hotmail.comwrote in message
news:11**********************@b58g2000hsg.googlegr oups.com...

>I think that anyone causing a reboot for anything should be forbidden

if someone makes me reboot? they can screw themselves

you kids just have no clue how many machines I have.. and until MS
releases SMS Home Edition, I'm not going to run around installing 200
mb patches on all of my machines

There is cure called broadband ;)

And it's not 200 mb. I think the largest framework (the latest one) is
around 60 mb?

and 'its comign on vista' is a stupid fucknig argument

Someone said Microsoft should force people to upgrade. I hate vista too -
but your anger would imply that you seem to have gotten the wrong idea.

vb6 runtime is on every copy of windows ever since what.. windows 95?

So . . . No one should be able to develop with anything past VB6?

FuK .NOT

You should get your keyboard checked, it seems to interject random capitals
and periods.

--
LTP

:)

[RobinS]

Just FYI, Luc, that's our neighborhood troll. He has several aliases,
including (but not limited to) susiedba, dbahooker, aaronkempf,
larrylinsonjr, pfcsadr, and todosmenos or something like that.

Trying to talk sense into him is like trying to throw away a boomerang.

Robin S.
-------------------------------------
"Luc The Perverse" <sl***********************@cc.usu.eduwrote in message
news:t6************@loki.cmears.id.au...

"Susie DBA [MSFT]" <su******@hotmail.comwrote in message
news:11**********************@b58g2000hsg.googlegr oups.com...

>>I think that anyone causing a reboot for anything should be forbidden

if someone makes me reboot? they can screw themselves

you kids just have no clue how many machines I have.. and until MS
releases SMS Home Edition, I'm not going to run around installing 200
mb patches on all of my machines

There is cure called broadband ;)

And it's not 200 mb. I think the largest framework (the latest one) is
around 60 mb?

>and 'its comign on vista' is a stupid fucknig argument

Someone said Microsoft should force people to upgrade. I hate vista
too - but your anger would imply that you seem to have gotten the wrong
idea.

>vb6 runtime is on every copy of windows ever since what.. windows 95?

So . . . No one should be able to develop with anything past VB6?

>FuK .NOT

You should get your keyboard checked, it seems to interject random
capitals and periods.

--
LTP

:)

[Susie DBA [MSFT]]

it's not called random characters

you see.. I spend all day typing shit in sharepoint; and since
sharepoint doesn't support HTML (who the hell came up with that idea)
i've got to use underscores and capitals for emphasis


On Apr 18, 7:57 am, "Luc The Perverse"
<[e-mail]:

"Susie DBA [MSFT]" <[e-mail] in messagenews:11**********************@b58g2000hsg.g ooglegroups.com...

I think that anyone causing a reboot for anything should be forbidden

if someone makes me reboot? they can screw themselves

you kids just have no clue how many machines I have.. and until MS
releases SMS Home Edition, I'm not going to run around installing 200
mb patches on all of my machines

There is cure called broadband ;)

And it's not 200 mb. I think the largest framework (the latest one) is
around 60 mb?

and 'its comign on vista' is a stupid fucknig argument

Someone said Microsoft should force people to upgrade. I hate vista too -
but your anger would imply that you seem to have gotten the wrong idea.

vb6 runtime is on every copy of windows ever since what.. windows 95?

So . . . No one should be able to develop with anything past VB6?

FuK .NOT

You should get your keyboard checked, it seems to interject random capitals
and periods.

--
LTP

:)

[Susie DBA [MSFT]]

and it is 200mb

and it is a memoy hog
and it is a processor hog
and it does slow down your machine

I mean _WOW_

dotnet sucks balls

I call for the US AirForce to napalm Microsoft to get them to grow up

stop inventing needless complexity

On Apr 18, 7:57 am, "Luc The Perverse"
<[e-mail]:

"Susie DBA [MSFT]" <[e-mail] in messagenews:11**********************@b58g2000hsg.g ooglegroups.com...

I think that anyone causing a reboot for anything should be forbidden

if someone makes me reboot? they can screw themselves

you kids just have no clue how many machines I have.. and until MS
releases SMS Home Edition, I'm not going to run around installing 200
mb patches on all of my machines

There is cure called broadband ;)

And it's not 200 mb. I think the largest framework (the latest one) is
around 60 mb?

and 'its comign on vista' is a stupid fucknig argument

Someone said Microsoft should force people to upgrade. I hate vista too -
but your anger would imply that you seem to have gotten the wrong idea.

vb6 runtime is on every copy of windows ever since what.. windows 95?

So . . . No one should be able to develop with anything past VB6?

FuK .NOT

You should get your keyboard checked, it seems to interject random capitals
and periods.

--
LTP

:)

[Susie DBA [MSFT]]

yes.. but 3.0 is _SUPPOSED_ to be backwards compataible with 1.0 and
1.1 and 2.0

I mean I'm sick and tired of this SUPPOSED to I want to start seeing
BUG FREE SOFTWARE from MS
Seriously

hire more testers, hire an army of programmers

On Apr 15, 10:07 pm, "RobinS" <[e-mail]:

Thanks, but I was looking for information that would support .Net 2.0, not
1.1. :-(

As it turns out, you don't have to reboot after installing .Net 2.0,
either.

Oh, and by the way, .Net 1.1 is not included in Windows Vista.

Thanks anyway.
Robin S.
------------------------------------------
"Bruce W. Darby" <[e-mail] in messagenews:Os******************************@comca st.com...

Robin,

This year my company deployed a .Net 1.1 app in asp.net. I've installed
the application on over 30 computers and have not had to restart the
computer once for the .Net stuff. The only thing that caused me to have
to reboot the machine is if the user had not updated their MDAC
components.

Bruce

"RobinS" <[e-mail] in message
news:ML******************************@comcast.com. ..

"Jim Rand" <[e-mail] in message
news:um**************@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
Hi Robin,

>I'm just going to live with it for now.

>At a recent MSDN roadshow I asked one of the presenters if VS 2005 runs
faster on Vista as his system didn't seem to suffer the same
performance issues. He smiled and said that one of the benefits of
working for Microsoft is he gets really fast computers - in this case a
dual-core processor coupled with 4 gigs of memory.

>The only major issues that I have with VS 2005 are:

> 1) The form designer performance. The rest of the time while working
in the code, performance is ok.

I think upgrading to SP1 helped this problem.

> 2) The dataset designer and the SQL code it generates. That was so
bad that I rolled my own in MS Access which allows me to do in minutes
what is impossible with the xsd designer.

I mucked around and wrote something that would generate the strongly
typed dataset w/o the table adapters, but haven't actually had time to
implement it yet.

>Next year should be great - a new machine, Windows Vista, and VS 2008
with the kinks worked out.

>Jim

>VS 2008 with the kinks worked out.

LOL. You're such an optimist. :-D

Robin S.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

[Susie DBA [MSFT]]

dude.. WOW

where in the hell do you come up with this mis-information

I think that these are _GREAT_ numbers.
but I know for a fact that they're mother fucking wrong.

I've got a new tablet; and it sure as hell doesn't have the .NET 2.0
framework.

I am pretty sure that there has only been one EDITION of tablet PC..
so I think that your # is kinda ridiculous

and media center includes .NET?

that's a _GREAT_ statistic-- thank you Robin

4) More than 90% of the computers sold in 2006 had the .Net 2.0
framework
installed. It was included in the Windows XP Media Center edition
shipped
to millions of consumers in 2005 and 2006. It was also included in
the
Windows XP Tablet Edition.
* More than 65% of Windows XP computers worldwide have the .Net
Framework
installed.
* MSFT estimates that about 500M PCs worldwide have some version of
the
..Net Framework installed.
So that's what I found out. The most interesting stuff (to me) was
the
internationalization capabilities.

On Apr 16, 12:22 am, "RobinS" <[e-mail]:

The jury is still out, but I'm hopeful. Here are the reasons, in case
anyone else wants to see them. I got some of the numbers from the web, and
some from a friend who works at MSFT.

1) Internationalization has a lot of new and helpful stuff in .Net 2.0. For
one thing, the resource manager handles not just strings, but bitmaps,
images, audio, etc. For another, the TableLayoutPanel and FlowLayoutPanel
can help with the resizing of the form because of the differences in the
length of strings. (More controls support the AutoSize property, too). .Net
2.0 supports Arabic and Hebrew, and has properties to help internationalize
currency names and handle right-to-left languages.

2) When you deploy the .Net 1.1 framework, if you want the installation
script to be in the local language, you must deploy that version of the
framework. For .Net 2.0, they are all included in the same version.

3) ClickOnce deployment is only available in .Net 2.0, which they can use
to deploy their app and handle incremental updates.

4) More than 90% of the computers sold in 2006 had the .Net 2.0 framework
installed. It was included in the Windows XP Media Center edition shipped
to millions of consumers in 2005 and 2006. It was also included in the
Windows XP Tablet Edition.

5) All versions of Windows Vista have .Net 2.0 installed. According to
MSFT, over 20 million copies of Vista were sold in the first two months
after its launch.

6) Windows Vista does *not* have .Net 1.1 installed.

7) The .Net 2.0 Framework is included in many of MSFT's own products, like
Encarta, the new Expression products, Windows Live OneCare, and of course
Visual Studio 2005.

8) The adoption of .Net 2.0 was much higher in its initial phases than .Net
1.1, and is spreading substantially faster than .Net 1.1 did.

And some general info about .Net proliferation (not version-specific) for
anyone who's interested:

* Software built by MSFT partners and MSFT itself is responsible for the
.Net Framework being installed on over 200 million systems worldwide. .Net
software runs in 95% of the Global 1000.

* For custom-developed apps, 44% of respondents in the US use the .Net
development platform.

* The vast majority of Windows XP machines in the US have the .Net
Framework installed.

* More than 65% of Windows XP computers worldwide have the .Net Framework
installed.

* MSFT estimates that about 500M PCs worldwide have some version of the
.Net Framework installed.

So that's what I found out. The most interesting stuff (to me) was the
internationalization capabilities.

Robin S.
-----------------------------
"Bruce W. Darby" <[e-mail] in messagenews:9p******************************@comca st.com...

I know, but for the most part, I was just hoping what little information I
could provide you would be in the smallest way useful. :) Hope you were
able to convince them.

Bruce
"RobinS" <[e-mail] in message
news:HL******************************@comcast.com. ..

Thanks, but I was looking for information that would support .Net 2.0,
not 1.1. :-(

As it turns out, you don't have to reboot after installing .Net 2.0,
either.

Oh, and by the way, .Net 1.1 is not included in Windows Vista.

Thanks anyway.
Robin S.
------------------------------------------
"Bruce W. Darby" <[e-mail] in message
news:Os******************************@comcast.com ...
Robin,

>This year my company deployed a .Net 1.1 app in asp.net. I've installed
the application on over 30 computers and have not had to restart the
computer once for the .Net stuff. The only thing that caused me to have
to reboot the machine is if the user had not updated their MDAC
components.

>Bruce

>"RobinS" <[e-mail] in message
news:ML******************************@comcast.co m...

>>"Jim Rand" <[e-mail] in message
news:um**************@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
Hi Robin,

>>>I'm just going to live with it for now.

>>>At a recent MSDN roadshow I asked one of the presenters if VS 2005
runs faster on Vista as his system didn't seem to suffer the same
performance issues. He smiled and said that one of the benefits of
working for Microsoft is he gets really fast computers - in this case
a dual-core processor coupled with 4 gigs of memory.

>>>The only major issues that I have with VS 2005 are:

>>> 1) The form designer performance. The rest of the time while working
in the code, performance is ok.

>>I think upgrading to SP1 helped this problem.

>>> 2) The dataset designer and the SQL code it generates. That was so
bad that I rolled my own in MS Access which allows me to do in
minutes what is impossible with the xsd designer.

>>I mucked around and wrote something that would generate the strongly
typed dataset w/o the table adapters, but haven't actually had time to
implement it yet.

>>>Next year should be great - a new machine, Windows Vista, and VS 2008
with the kinks worked out.

>>>Jim

>>>VS 2008 with the kinks worked out.

>>LOL. You're such an optimist. :-D

>>Robin S.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

[Susie DBA [MSFT]]

but

7) The .Net 2.0 Framework is included in many of MSFT's own products,
like
Encarta, the new Expression products, Windows Live OneCare, and of
course
Visual Studio 2005.

OneCare is slow as Crap; I'm not so sure that this is a good thing to
advertise
and for the record, the version of Microsoft AntiSpyware that was
released a year ago? it was built in Vb6


On Apr 16, 12:22 am, "RobinS" <[e-mail]:

The jury is still out, but I'm hopeful. Here are the reasons, in case
anyone else wants to see them. I got some of the numbers from the web, and
some from a friend who works at MSFT.

1) Internationalization has a lot of new and helpful stuff in .Net 2.0. For
one thing, the resource manager handles not just strings, but bitmaps,
images, audio, etc. For another, the TableLayoutPanel and FlowLayoutPanel
can help with the resizing of the form because of the differences in the
length of strings. (More controls support the AutoSize property, too). .Net
2.0 supports Arabic and Hebrew, and has properties to help internationalize
currency names and handle right-to-left languages.

2) When you deploy the .Net 1.1 framework, if you want the installation
script to be in the local language, you must deploy that version of the
framework. For .Net 2.0, they are all included in the same version.

3) ClickOnce deployment is only available in .Net 2.0, which they can use
to deploy their app and handle incremental updates.

4) More than 90% of the computers sold in 2006 had the .Net 2.0 framework
installed. It was included in the Windows XP Media Center edition shipped
to millions of consumers in 2005 and 2006. It was also included in the
Windows XP Tablet Edition.

5) All versions of Windows Vista have .Net 2.0 installed. According to
MSFT, over 20 million copies of Vista were sold in the first two months
after its launch.

6) Windows Vista does *not* have .Net 1.1 installed.

7) The .Net 2.0 Framework is included in many of MSFT's own products, like
Encarta, the new Expression products, Windows Live OneCare, and of course
Visual Studio 2005.

8) The adoption of .Net 2.0 was much higher in its initial phases than .Net
1.1, and is spreading substantially faster than .Net 1.1 did.

And some general info about .Net proliferation (not version-specific) for
anyone who's interested:

* Software built by MSFT partners and MSFT itself is responsible for the
.Net Framework being installed on over 200 million systems worldwide. .Net
software runs in 95% of the Global 1000.

* For custom-developed apps, 44% of respondents in the US use the .Net
development platform.

* The vast majority of Windows XP machines in the US have the .Net
Framework installed.

* More than 65% of Windows XP computers worldwide have the .Net Framework
installed.

* MSFT estimates that about 500M PCs worldwide have some version of the
.Net Framework installed.

So that's what I found out. The most interesting stuff (to me) was the
internationalization capabilities.

Robin S.
-----------------------------
"Bruce W. Darby" <[e-mail] in messagenews:9p******************************@comca st.com...

I know, but for the most part, I was just hoping what little information I
could provide you would be in the smallest way useful. :) Hope you were
able to convince them.

Bruce
"RobinS" <[e-mail] in message
news:HL******************************@comcast.com. ..

Thanks, but I was looking for information that would support .Net 2.0,
not 1.1. :-(

As it turns out, you don't have to reboot after installing .Net 2.0,
either.

Oh, and by the way, .Net 1.1 is not included in Windows Vista.

Thanks anyway.
Robin S.
------------------------------------------
"Bruce W. Darby" <[e-mail] in message
news:Os******************************@comcast.com ...
Robin,

>This year my company deployed a .Net 1.1 app in asp.net. I've installed
the application on over 30 computers and have not had to restart the
computer once for the .Net stuff. The only thing that caused me to have
to reboot the machine is if the user had not updated their MDAC
components.

>Bruce

>"RobinS" <[e-mail] in message
news:ML******************************@comcast.co m...

>>"Jim Rand" <[e-mail] in message
news:um**************@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
Hi Robin,

>>>I'm just going to live with it for now.

>>>At a recent MSDN roadshow I asked one of the presenters if VS 2005
runs faster on Vista as his system didn't seem to suffer the same
performance issues. He smiled and said that one of the benefits of
working for Microsoft is he gets really fast computers - in this case
a dual-core processor coupled with 4 gigs of memory.

>>>The only major issues that I have with VS 2005 are:

>>> 1) The form designer performance. The rest of the time while working
in the code, performance is ok.

>>I think upgrading to SP1 helped this problem.

>>> 2) The dataset designer and the SQL code it generates. That was so
bad that I rolled my own in MS Access which allows me to do in
minutes what is impossible with the xsd designer.

>>I mucked around and wrote something that would generate the strongly
typed dataset w/o the table adapters, but haven't actually had time to
implement it yet.

>>>Next year should be great - a new machine, Windows Vista, and VS 2008
with the kinks worked out.

>>>Jim

>>>VS 2008 with the kinks worked out.

>>LOL. You're such an optimist. :-D

>>Robin S.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

[Susie DBA [MSFT]]

and I really really don't believe this number

* MSFT estimates that about 500M PCs worldwide have some version of
the
..Net Framework installed.
I mean WOW

does Microsoft really think that there are 2 billion PCs worldwide?

I know I've got 20+ but still

On Apr 16, 12:22 am, "RobinS" <[e-mail]:

The jury is still out, but I'm hopeful. Here are the reasons, in case
anyone else wants to see them. I got some of the numbers from the web, and
some from a friend who works at MSFT.

1) Internationalization has a lot of new and helpful stuff in .Net 2.0. For
one thing, the resource manager handles not just strings, but bitmaps,
images, audio, etc. For another, the TableLayoutPanel and FlowLayoutPanel
can help with the resizing of the form because of the differences in the
length of strings. (More controls support the AutoSize property, too). .Net
2.0 supports Arabic and Hebrew, and has properties to help internationalize
currency names and handle right-to-left languages.

2) When you deploy the .Net 1.1 framework, if you want the installation
script to be in the local language, you must deploy that version of the
framework. For .Net 2.0, they are all included in the same version.

3) ClickOnce deployment is only available in .Net 2.0, which they can use
to deploy their app and handle incremental updates.

4) More than 90% of the computers sold in 2006 had the .Net 2.0 framework
installed. It was included in the Windows XP Media Center edition shipped
to millions of consumers in 2005 and 2006. It was also included in the
Windows XP Tablet Edition.

5) All versions of Windows Vista have .Net 2.0 installed. According to
MSFT, over 20 million copies of Vista were sold in the first two months
after its launch.

6) Windows Vista does *not* have .Net 1.1 installed.

7) The .Net 2.0 Framework is included in many of MSFT's own products, like
Encarta, the new Expression products, Windows Live OneCare, and of course
Visual Studio 2005.

8) The adoption of .Net 2.0 was much higher in its initial phases than .Net
1.1, and is spreading substantially faster than .Net 1.1 did.

And some general info about .Net proliferation (not version-specific) for
anyone who's interested:

* Software built by MSFT partners and MSFT itself is responsible for the
.Net Framework being installed on over 200 million systems worldwide. .Net
software runs in 95% of the Global 1000.

* For custom-developed apps, 44% of respondents in the US use the .Net
development platform.

* The vast majority of Windows XP machines in the US have the .Net
Framework installed.

* More than 65% of Windows XP computers worldwide have the .Net Framework
installed.

* MSFT estimates that about 500M PCs worldwide have some version of the
.Net Framework installed.

So that's what I found out. The most interesting stuff (to me) was the
internationalization capabilities.

Robin S.
-----------------------------
"Bruce W. Darby" <[e-mail] in messagenews:9p******************************@comca st.com...

I know, but for the most part, I was just hoping what little information I
could provide you would be in the smallest way useful. :) Hope you were
able to convince them.

Bruce
"RobinS" <[e-mail] in message
news:HL******************************@comcast.com. ..

Thanks, but I was looking for information that would support .Net 2.0,
not 1.1. :-(

As it turns out, you don't have to reboot after installing .Net 2.0,
either.

Oh, and by the way, .Net 1.1 is not included in Windows Vista.

Thanks anyway.
Robin S.
------------------------------------------
"Bruce W. Darby" <[e-mail] in message
news:Os******************************@comcast.com ...
Robin,

>This year my company deployed a .Net 1.1 app in asp.net. I've installed
the application on over 30 computers and have not had to restart the
computer once for the .Net stuff. The only thing that caused me to have
to reboot the machine is if the user had not updated their MDAC
components.

>Bruce

>"RobinS" <[e-mail] in message
news:ML******************************@comcast.co m...

>>"Jim Rand" <[e-mail] in message
news:um**************@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
Hi Robin,

>>>I'm just going to live with it for now.

>>>At a recent MSDN roadshow I asked one of the presenters if VS 2005
runs faster on Vista as his system didn't seem to suffer the same
performance issues. He smiled and said that one of the benefits of
working for Microsoft is he gets really fast computers - in this case
a dual-core processor coupled with 4 gigs of memory.

>>>The only major issues that I have with VS 2005 are:

>>> 1) The form designer performance. The rest of the time while working
in the code, performance is ok.

>>I think upgrading to SP1 helped this problem.

>>> 2) The dataset designer and the SQL code it generates. That was so
bad that I rolled my own in MS Access which allows me to do in
minutes what is impossible with the xsd designer.

>>I mucked around and wrote something that would generate the strongly
typed dataset w/o the table adapters, but haven't actually had time to
implement it yet.

>>>Next year should be great - a new machine, Windows Vista, and VS 2008
with the kinks worked out.

>>>Jim

>>>VS 2008 with the kinks worked out.

>>LOL. You're such an optimist. :-D

>>Robin S.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

[Luc The Perverse]

"Susie DBA [MSFT]" <su******@hotmail.comwrote in message
news:11**********************@n76g2000hsh.googlegr oups.com...

and I really really don't believe this number

* MSFT estimates that about 500M PCs worldwide have some version of
the
.Net Framework installed.
I mean WOW

does Microsoft really think that there are 2 billion PCs worldwide?

I know I've got 20+ but still

I suppose you have statistics to back up your argument?

It's like you're ranting, carrying on, arguing and I can't even really tell
what you are trying to say. It's like your angry and no one knows why. . .
Are you a troll?

I mean - I imagine Microsoft didn't just pull that number out of thin air.

And where is 2 billion PCs coming from? Did MS say 1/4 of computers have
..NET - or is this another figure that you are making up.

If every man woman and child in a developed country had 1 one computer with
..NET on it that would be WAY over the 500 M mark. I, personally, have 2
computers in my house, 2 computers at work which are "mine" and all have
..NET on them. (I didn't count my Linux server or embedded machine) I would
say the estimate seems about right.

Actually, using my "Susie DBA [MSFT]" method of inventing numbers, I think
MS is short by about 125,153 - but this is still excellent precision - and
they probably had a rounding error or the data was aged by a few days.

But you didn't say what you thought the number was

21 - 20 of your computers and 1 somewhere else?
499 Million?

At no point did you even say whether you thought the estimate was high or
low.

--
LTP

:)

[Spam Catcher]

"Luc The Perverse" <sl***********************@cc.usu.eduwrote in
news:76************@loki.cmears.id.au:

And where is 2 billion PCs coming from? Did MS say 1/4 of computers
have .NET - or is this another figure that you are making up.

If every man woman and child in a developed country had 1 one computer
with .NET on it that would be WAY over the 500 M mark. I,
personally, have 2 computers in my house, 2 computers at work which
are "mine" and all have .NET on them. (I didn't count my Linux server
or embedded machine) I would say the estimate seems about right.

I believe the world average is 100PCs per 1000 people. But of course in
developed countries the number is much higher. There is an esimated 1
billion PCs in the world. With Microsoft having ~90% of the desktop market,
it's not surprising there are over 500 million PCs with .NET on it. The
other 500 million are probably obsolete PCs ;-)

[Luc The Perverse]

"Susie DBA [MSFT]" <su******@hotmail.comwrote in message
news:11**********************@l77g2000hsb.googlegr oups.com...

it's not called random characters

you see.. I spend all day typing shit in sharepoint; and since
sharepoint doesn't support HTML (who the hell came up with that idea)
i've got to use underscores and capitals for emphasis

Ugh. I didn't say "random characters" I said "it seems to interject random
capitals and periods"

The text in question was "FuK .NOT"

Is this _EMPHASIS_? I might have given you a little credit if you said you
were trying to hint at/imply "fuck .NET"

I've used all capitals, astericks (although not underscores maybe dashes)
for emphasis, but not tried partial word capitalization or deliberate
mispelling of profanity. I assume this is at work that you have to use
these methods to get through to people? (I can't imagine any other
environment which would force a person to use sharepoint.)

And seriously - it was a joke. I never actually thought anything was wrong
with your keyboard. You have now dedicated an entire post and my reply (an
official thread fork) to explaining why you can't produce clear english.
I'm not going to have another conversation about posting style - especially
not in this NG!! hehe (In other words there is no reason to reply to this
post)

--
LTP

:)

[Susie DBA [MSFT]]

yeah.. microsoft did pull the number out of their ass
and for the record; .net doesn't work in vista

and dotnet framework doesn't ship on _ANY_ computers

so I find it fucking ridiculous
the number is obviously high

but the fact of the matter is that this is one of those things that MS
should be posting all over the world

as it is; deployment of the .NET framework is like the major reason
that .NET adoption is like 20%

VB was the worlds most popular language

..NET still isn't a complete replaceent for VB6

I can't run VB.net in a browser

so fuck M$

On Apr 18, 9:01 pm, "Luc The Perverse"
<[e-mail]:

"Susie DBA [MSFT]" <[e-mail] in messagenews:11**********************@n76g2000hsh.g ooglegroups.com...

and I really really don't believe this number

* MSFT estimates that about 500M PCs worldwide have some version of
the
.Net Framework installed.

I mean WOW

does Microsoft really think that there are 2 billion PCs worldwide?

I know I've got 20+ but still

I suppose you have statistics to back up your argument?

It's like you're ranting, carrying on, arguing and I can't even really tell
what you are trying to say. It's like your angry and no one knows why. . .
Are you a troll?

I mean - I imagine Microsoft didn't just pull that number out of thin air.

And where is 2 billion PCs coming from? Did MS say 1/4 of computers have
.NET - or is this another figure that you are making up.

If every man woman and child in a developed country had 1 one computer with
.NET on it that would be WAY over the 500 M mark. I, personally, have 2
computers in my house, 2 computers at work which are "mine" and all have
.NET on them. (I didn't count my Linux server or embedded machine) I would
say the estimate seems about right.

Actually, using my "Susie DBA [MSFT]" method of inventing numbers, I think
MS is short by about 125,153 - but this is still excellent precision - and
they probably had a rounding error or the data was aged by a few days.

But you didn't say what you thought the number was

21 - 20 of your computers and 1 somewhere else?
499 Million?

At no point did you even say whether you thought the estimate was high or
low.

--
LTP

:)

[Susie DBA [MSFT]]

and seriously faggot

i've got a copy of tablet edition and it doesn't have the framework

so fuck you kid

On Apr 18, 9:01 pm, "Luc The Perverse"
<[e-mail]:

"Susie DBA [MSFT]" <[e-mail] in messagenews:11**********************@n76g2000hsh.g ooglegroups.com...

and I really really don't believe this number

* MSFT estimates that about 500M PCs worldwide have some version of
the
.Net Framework installed.

I mean WOW

does Microsoft really think that there are 2 billion PCs worldwide?

I know I've got 20+ but still

I suppose you have statistics to back up your argument?

It's like you're ranting, carrying on, arguing and I can't even really tell
what you are trying to say. It's like your angry and no one knows why. . .
Are you a troll?

I mean - I imagine Microsoft didn't just pull that number out of thin air.

And where is 2 billion PCs coming from? Did MS say 1/4 of computers have
.NET - or is this another figure that you are making up.

If every man woman and child in a developed country had 1 one computer with
.NET on it that would be WAY over the 500 M mark. I, personally, have 2
computers in my house, 2 computers at work which are "mine" and all have
.NET on them. (I didn't count my Linux server or embedded machine) I would
say the estimate seems about right.

Actually, using my "Susie DBA [MSFT]" method of inventing numbers, I think
MS is short by about 125,153 - but this is still excellent precision - and
they probably had a rounding error or the data was aged by a few days.

But you didn't say what you thought the number was

21 - 20 of your computers and 1 somewhere else?
499 Million?

At no point did you even say whether you thought the estimate was high or
low.

--
LTP

:)

[Susie DBA [MSFT]]

dude have you taken math class?
how does 500 million just have to be correct-- just because 90% of the
100m pc that were shipped last year; have the framework
I just totally call bullshit; and it doesn't excuse MS

just because a handful of media center boxes come with the framework--
it doesn't mean that everyone has it
it's an OPTIONAL download at windows update

On Apr 18, 9:57 pm, Spam Catcher <[e-mail]:

"Luc The Perverse" <[e-mail] innews:76************@loki.cmears.id.au:

And where is 2 billion PCs coming from? Did MS say 1/4 of computers
have .NET - or is this another figure that you are making up.

If every man woman and child in a developed country had 1 one computer
with .NET on it that would be WAY over the 500 M mark. I,
personally, have 2 computers in my house, 2 computers at work which
are "mine" and all have .NET on them. (I didn't count my Linux server
or embedded machine) I would say the estimate seems about right.

I believe the world average is 100PCs per 1000 people. But of course in
developed countries the number is much higher. There is an esimated 1
billion PCs in the world. With Microsoft having ~90% of the desktop market,
it's not surprising there are over 500 million PCs with .NET on it. The
other 500 million are probably obsolete PCs ;-)

[Susie DBA [MSFT]]

wow that's fucking awesome

now.. media center and .NET are both in the same category of great
ideas that suck balls?


media center is a complete failure



On Apr 18, 11:15 am, "Susie DBA [MSFT]" <[e-mail]:

dude.. WOW

where in the hell do you come up with this mis-information

I think that these are _GREAT_ numbers.
but I know for a fact that they're mother fucking wrong.

I've got a new tablet; and it sure as hell doesn't have the .NET 2.0
framework.

I am pretty sure that there has only been one EDITION of tablet PC..
so I think that your # is kinda ridiculous

and media center includes .NET?

that's a _GREAT_ statistic-- thank you Robin

4) More than 90% of the computers sold in 2006 had the .Net 2.0
framework
installed. It was included in the Windows XP Media Center edition
shipped
to millions of consumers in 2005 and 2006. It was also included in
the
Windows XP Tablet Edition.

* More than 65% of Windows XP computers worldwide have the .Net
Framework
installed.

* MSFT estimates that about 500M PCs worldwide have some version of
the
.Net Framework installed.

So that's what I found out. The most interesting stuff (to me) was
the
internationalization capabilities.

On Apr 16, 12:22 am, "RobinS" <[e-mail]:

The jury is still out, but I'm hopeful. Here are the reasons, in case
anyone else wants to see them. I got some of the numbers from the web, and
some from a friend who works at MSFT.

1) Internationalization has a lot of new and helpful stuff in .Net 2.0. For
one thing, the resource manager handles not just strings, but bitmaps,
images, audio, etc. For another, the TableLayoutPanel and FlowLayoutPanel
can help with the resizing of the form because of the differences in the
length of strings. (More controls support the AutoSize property, too). .Net
2.0 supports Arabic and Hebrew, and has properties to help internationalize
currency names and handle right-to-left languages.

2) When you deploy the .Net 1.1 framework, if you want the installation
script to be in the local language, you must deploy that version of the
framework. For .Net 2.0, they are all included in the same version.

3) ClickOnce deployment is only available in .Net 2.0, which they can use
to deploy their app and handle incremental updates.

4) More than 90% of the computers sold in 2006 had the .Net 2.0 framework
installed. It was included in the Windows XP Media Center edition shipped
to millions of consumers in 2005 and 2006. It was also included in the
Windows XP Tablet Edition.

5) All versions of Windows Vista have .Net 2.0 installed. According to
MSFT, over 20 million copies of Vista were sold in the first two months
after its launch.

6) Windows Vista does *not* have .Net 1.1 installed.

7) The .Net 2.0 Framework is included in many of MSFT's own products, like
Encarta, the new Expression products, Windows Live OneCare, and of course
Visual Studio 2005.

8) The adoption of .Net 2.0 was much higher in its initial phases than .Net
1.1, and is spreading substantially faster than .Net 1.1 did.

And some general info about .Net proliferation (not version-specific) for
anyone who's interested:

* Software built by MSFT partners and MSFT itself is responsible for the
.Net Framework being installed on over 200 million systems worldwide. .Net
software runs in 95% of the Global 1000.

* For custom-developed apps, 44% of respondents in the US use the .Net
development platform.

* The vast majority of Windows XP machines in the US have the .Net
Framework installed.

* More than 65% of Windows XP computers worldwide have the .Net Framework
installed.

* MSFT estimates that about 500M PCs worldwide have some version of the
.Net Framework installed.

So that's what I found out. The most interesting stuff (to me) was the
internationalization capabilities.

Robin S.
-----------------------------
"Bruce W. Darby" <[e-mail] in messagenews:9p******************************@comca st.com...

>I know, but for the most part, I was just hoping what little information I
>could provide you would be in the smallest way useful. :) Hope you were
>able to convince them.

Bruce
"RobinS" <[e-mail] in message
>news:HL******************************@comcast.com ...
>Thanks, but I was looking for information that would support .Net 2.0,
>not 1.1. :-(

>As it turns out, you don't have to reboot after installing .Net 2.0,
>either.

>Oh, and by the way, .Net 1.1 is not included in Windows Vista.

>Thanks anyway.
>Robin S.
>------------------------------------------
>"Bruce W. Darby" <[e-mail] in message
>>news:Os******************************@comcast.co m...
>>Robin,

>>This year my company deployed a .Net 1.1 app in asp.net. I've installed
>>the application on over 30 computers and have not had to restart the
>>computer once for the .Net stuff. The only thing that caused me to have
>>to reboot the machine is if the user had not updated their MDAC
>>components.

>>Bruce

>>"RobinS" <[e-mail] in message
>>>news:ML******************************@comcast.c om...

>>>"Jim Rand" <[e-mail] in message
>>>>news:um**************@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl.. .
>>>>Hi Robin,

>>>>I'm just going to live with it for now.

>>>>At a recent MSDN roadshow I asked one of the presenters if VS 2005
>>>>runs faster on Vista as his system didn't seem to suffer the same
>>>>performance issues. He smiled and said that one of the benefits of
>>>>working for Microsoft is he gets really fast computers - in this case
>>>>a dual-core processor coupled with 4 gigs of memory.

>>>>The only major issues that I have with VS 2005 are:

>>>> 1) The form designer performance. The rest of the time while working
>>>>in the code, performance is ok.

>>>I think upgrading to SP1 helped this problem.

>>>> 2) The dataset designer and the SQL code it generates. That was so
>>>>bad that I rolled my own in MS Access which allows me to do in
>>>>minutes what is impossible with the xsd designer.

>>>I mucked around and wrote something that would generate the strongly
>>>typed dataset w/o the table adapters, but haven't actually had time to
>>>implement it yet.

>>>>Next year should be great - a new machine, Windows Vista, and VS 2008
>>>>with the kinks worked out.

>>>>Jim

>>>>VS 2008 with the kinks worked out.

>>>LOL. You're such an optimist. :-D

>>>Robin S.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

[Luc The Perverse]

"Susie DBA [MSFT]" <su******@hotmail.comwrote in message
news:11**********************@d57g2000hsg.googlegr oups.com...

and seriously faggot

i've got a copy of tablet edition and it doesn't have the framework

so fuck you kid

You're annoying.

*plonk*

--
LTP

:)

[Susie DBA [MSFT]]

yeah.. please explain

I've got a tablet.. and the framework doesn't show up under add/remove
programs

there's only one edition of Tablet Edition.. right??
tell me how I'm wrong.. try arguing with the FACTS

the framework is DOTNOT on a half billion desktops

get real, dipshits


On Apr 20, 9:14 am, "Luc The Perverse"
<[e-mail]:

"Susie DBA [MSFT]" <[e-mail] in messagenews:11**********************@d57g2000hsg.g ooglegroups.com...

and seriously faggot

i've got a copy of tablet edition and it doesn't have the framework

so fuck you kid

You're annoying.

*plonk*

--
LTP

:)