Home »
Windows
»
Windows Installation
Summary: .NET framework is an important support library for many programs. Unfortunately, its versioning and updating leave a lot to be desired.
|
Do i need Microsoft .net framework 1.1 and 2.0 service pack 1 and 3.0 service pack 1 on my desk top computer? I don't develop new software. |
The fact that you don't develop software actually has nothing to do with anything here.
.NET is most likely used by other software you have installed on your machine.
.NET versioning, unfortunately, is apparently a mess.
•
To cut to the chase: I wouldn't delete a thing. It possible that you do, in fact, need all those different versions of .NET - or not. We could go through a long exhaustive search to see which programs you have installed might require one version or the other, but in my opinion it's just not worth it.
OK, just what is the .NET framework?
To grossly oversimplify, it's a package of common support software that can be used by programs so that they don't all have to re-write the same software over and over again. More specifically, it's aimed at users of Microsoft's newer versions of programming languages like C#, Visual Basic .NET and others. The .NET framework provides a broad array of functionality that can be used by programs written in those languages to perform common tasks, most commonly things that involve interacting with Windows itself.
So you may well have programs installed on your machine that rely on the .NET framework, and thus deleting .NET will cause that program to fail. Over time, more and more programs have come to rely on .NET, so chances are actually pretty high that you have at least one and perhaps more that rely on .NET.
You get the .NET framework either of three ways:
It might already be on your machine. Certain versions of the .NET framework are pre-installed on some versions of Windows.
A program you install might install it. The .NET framework is available in what are called "redistributable packages", which means nothing more than software vendors can include it in the software they deliver to you. If a program requires the .NET framework, then it may include it on its CD or in its download, and install it automatically as part of installing the program.
You may be instructed to download it. The .NET framework tends to be large, and because it's also fairly common these days, many vendors are opting not to actually include it in their distributions, but instead ask you to download and install it if you don't already have the required version.
Now, about those versions.
The .NET framework versions installed on my machine
Normally, it's safe to assume that version 2 of some software replaces version 1, and that version 3 replaces both 1 and 2. Each later version includes everything in the prior versions, so that the prior versions are no longer necessary.
Apparently the .NET framework isn't "normal". For example, software that requires .NET framework version 1 might not work if only version 2 is installed. In fact, you'll already note that while most software upgrades replace the previous versions, .NET framework installations do not. If you install version N+1, version N remains.
That's kind of frustrating.
But the solution is simple: leave them there. Yes, they eat up more disk space, but unless you really know what you're doing or want to spend a lot of time experimenting (back up first!), just leave them there and get on with your life.
Rumors are that the mess will get cleaned up in a future version, but in all honesty, I'm skeptical.
Related:
Is it safe to uninstall updates? Some updates might be safe to uninstall, but doing so makes some risky assumptions. Most programs keep only the patches they need.
Are automatic updates a good thing? Unless you're willing to pay a lot of attention on a very regular basis, automatic updates are an important part of keeping your machine safe.
Article C3563 - November 13, 2008
I have just read this article again because I cannot update .Net1.1 update and I was told by Microsoft to uninstall then re install and they gave me all the instructions on thier up date website. I was not to sure if I could do all this and now I am beggining to wonder if I did the right thing by just leaving it.
Posted by: Richard Grieves at December 22, 2008 6:27 AMJust read you explanation of the purpose of .NET Framework. I receive updates all the time without understanding what it does (I was educated a software programmer 30 years ago). The Microsoft explanation (and several others') are completely incomprehensible (to me). Not yours. Thank you. Microsoft should be sorry you quit, because those who try to explain .NET Framework does not seem to be able to measure up...
Posted by: W Saeter at January 28, 2009 3:30 AMI was supposing (guessing) that .NET framework was something used by my installed programs rather than by me but wasn't sure. I liked this article because I remember very painfully VB Runtime and DLL Hell and have several small, speciality programs that use them.
Posted by: Carl Alexander at February 7, 2009 5:30 PMLeo, this article was more enlighting than Wikipedia whichs never really tells a non-programer what it does. Thanks
Well, its a good thing that they created this .NET stuff, so that people wouldn't have to keep rewriting basic code. I have few if any applications that use it, but I have hundreds of megabytes of file data for .NET components.
Then, someone is saying that we should just keep all the versions on our computers because MY harddisk space is cheap and MY time spent fixing it is not. Thats the kind of attitude that gets us here. I think it should be THEIR time fixing it and making it right in the first place.
What a mess this .NET stuff is.
If you want your software to be run on a VM use Java. If you want native apps use native code. Now we are going to have system software running in a VM oh joy! Better get that new CPU and extra memory to support the next generation of bloatware.
Better update your internet connection while your at it to support all the latest .NET updates that are coming your way!
Posted by: Rober Jones at February 15, 2009 12:21 PMLeo! I found "Ask Leo" about 4 ,5 weeks ago and a day doesn't go by where in a few minutes you mange brilliantly to cut through the junk , save me countless hours of time on maintenance. I had the NET Framework 1 and 2 downloaded automatically. When I was asked by "Uniblue register" to download NEt Framework 3 I had "errors" many hours on the phone with Microsoft windows tech support, countless emails, sending in logs, registry,and major coniptions to no avail.I finally asked Microsoft if I need their NET Framework and they said no as a home user who doesn't program.{They prbably wanted to get me off their tail}.
Posted by: Moshe Natan at March 5, 2009 2:34 PMThanks for clearing things up quickly and simply as you always do.
What a relief to find that others find Microsoft's explanations incomprehensible. I almost deleted .Net Framework until reading this article, thinking it was foundation for a programming language that I wasn't into. Thank you, Leo, and all you other respondents.
Posted by: Kim Lambert at March 6, 2009 5:04 PMExcellent explanation - I need additional help! So, I get the part that you sometimes need various versions of the .NET Framwork for other programs, my problem is that I tried to install a software program that included .NET (v2 if I remember correctly) as a redistributable, but when it got to the .NET installation part, it gave me an error and wouldn't let me continue the download. Needless to say, I can't run that software on my computer w/out it.
I talked to the software tech support, they said the problem was with MSoft, not them, so they wouldn't help. Any suggestions? Is there a version of .NET that is compatible with Vista that might work for my software?
30-Mar-2009
I disregarded what Leo said and I deleted all the .net framework versions back as far as but not including the 1.1 hotfix. Well it didn't make any improvement - just as Leo suggested it wouuldn't - but it didn't seem to do any damage either. That is, I had non responsive start ups to IE8 before I did uninstalled the later version of .net framework and I still get the same non responsive start ups with IE8 at the same frequency as before. I will keep an eye on it. I might reinstal the .net 2.0 and 3.0 and the other updates back on if I find I'm getting any problems. I really have no idea what all of these .net framework version are for anyway.
Posted by: Richard at April 10, 2009 9:07 AMWell, I should have just got rid of IE8. Instead I had assume the issues weren't with IE8 but were with either AVG8 or else .net Framework. After getting rid of most versions of .net Framework back until 1.1 I still had start up issues with IE8. So, I uninstalled IE8 and am back with IE7 (which I should have done in the first place!). IE7 works fine so I'm putting back all the versions of .net Framework available because it wasn't that causing me problems. Well, this all took me a couple of hours and some frustration - but I should have accepted the most obvious cause - the new IE8 and not started looking around for other causes it turned out not to be! Thanx for the good pointers on this .net Framework, Leo. I tried going against you but I came back to see you were probably right in the first place!
Posted by: Richard at April 10, 2009 10:08 AMI have one question:
Posted by: Neeraj Singh at May 25, 2009 7:56 AMMy application was hosted in a server where .Net framework 1.1 and 2.0 was installed.
Due to my requirement I have installed .Net framework 3.5 as of one more application which was development under .Net framework just want to run on the same serevr.
But after installing .Net 3.5 framework, current running application is not working properly.
Is there any draw back to insatll multiple .Net framework into single server. Please suggest ???