Connect with us

.NET Framework ??

Discussion in 'CAD' started by Jim Thompson, Feb 16, 2007.

Scroll to continue with content
  1. Jim Thompson

    Jim Thompson Guest

    I downloaded a calendar program that also installed ".NET Framework"

    I uninstalled the calendar... pure crap.

    Does ".NET Framework" have any usefulness, or should I uninstall it as
    well?

    ...Jim Thompson
     
  2. No.
     
  3. Genome

    Genome Guest

    No..... your computer worked before it was installed your computer will work
    after you get rid of it.

    I know three fifths of bugger all about this stuff but .NET is some new
    MicroCrap crap which is another layer of shit MicroCrap are layering on top
    of their other crap to 'consolidate' programming under Windows.

    The fact that this calendar program had to install bits or all of the .NET
    framework just so it could tell you what day of the week it is and was shit
    at doing that just tells you it is a shit piece of software...... probably
    written in Visual NET or some other MicroCrap Crap....

    You can now get Borland Turbo Delphi for free and write applications for
    commercial use. That uses the .NET framework BUT produces stand alone
    executables that do not need to install .NET crap on your computer to work.

    Fortunately Homer has me on plonk so he won't be able to comment on the crap
    I just wrote.

    DNA

    I am not associated with the IAENG. ;-)
     
  4. Joel Kolstad

    Joel Kolstad Guest

    You'll need it if you ever intend to run any software written in Microsoft's
    ".Net" languages (C#, VB.net, etc.). If you know the framework wasn't
    installed before using the calendar program (something that might not be
    clear -- a crappy calendar program is liable to try to install the framework
    even if it was already present), then you can safely remove it.

    Worst case you'd just have to visit Microsoft.Com and re-install the framework
    if suddenly some program refused to run...

    ---Joel
     
  5. John Larkin

    John Larkin Guest


    I think .net is standard on an XP system.

    John
     
  6. Lord Garth

    Lord Garth Guest


    Most of the replies you've received were correct but nobody said it was
    MS replacement for the loss of Java....I try not to load it but it is
    becoming
    harder to run without it. For instance, the professional version of
    Quickbooks
    requires it as do the HP printer driver though the later may only be for
    that
    stupid photo publishing crap I don't want in the first place!


    ..NET does indeed appear to be more crap upon crap
     
  7. Jim Thompson

    Jim Thompson Guest

    No. My surfing around says it's standard on Server 2003 and Vista.
    ".NET Framework" shows as an installed program in add/remove programs.

    ...Jim Thompson
     
  8. It is what it is. You do need it for a lot of software.


    --
    ..
    ..
    ..
    ..
    ..
    ..
    ..
    ..
     
  9. Its logically similar to Java's runtime. If you have apps that require
    it, you need it.

    I'm not sure how one would do this on a Windows platform, but see if
    there is some sort of process and/or resource tracking app. that can
    tell you what components are using memory. Microsoft (according to some
    wizards) has a habit of loading lots of crap (DLLs, etc.) into memory at
    startup so that apps will load faster when called up. If the .NET
    runtime does this and you don't need it, either turn off this preload
    (I'm not sure how) or delete it.
     
  10. You can uninstall it or leave it, its not doing any harm.

    Cheers
     
  11. jasen

    jasen Guest

    not by itself, you might come across other software that uses it
    but by then you may need to upgrade it anyway
     
  12. Most people are migrating to managed code now, so be it java runtime
    or .net framework its probably worth keeping. It's not (or was not)
    standard on XP either BTW.
     
  13. Yes, but more and more people are using .net. Once installed, thats
    it.
    Its the same as java.
    Actually, its probably more robust and secure than any borland app.
    Borland Delphi just wraps up MFC anyway, so therefore it is just a
    layer of crap sitting upon windows. Might as well just do it in c#.
    You can get the Visual Studio Express for free now too, and you are
    even allowed to write commercial code with it. If you dont want .net,
    then use the free Visual STudio express c++ edition and write an
    unmanaged c++ MFC application.
    No great loss there.
     
  14. Removing and reinstalling software may lead to corruption.


    --
    ..
    ..
    ..
    ..
    ..
    ..
    ..
    ..


    ---
     
  15. It's a windows thing - once it is on there, you might as well leave it be. I got
    it with an ATI graphics driver.
     
  16. Genome

    Genome Guest

    ..
    Shows how much I know then... Time to download more stuff?

    DNA
     
  17. I'd also recommend not uninstalling it, unless you're really sure you'll
    never be running any .NET apps before you reinstall Windows. The
    uninstaller, IME, often leaves enough junk around such that any future .NET
    frameworks won't work properly. As far as I can tell, it doesn't do any harm
    besides consuming disk space.

    [...]
    Even numbered version, no argument. Odd numbered version are generally
    pretty good though :)

    [...]
    The non-.NET version of Delphi uses it's own component library (VCL or CLX)
    not MFC. It sits on top of the Win32 layer, so is at the same level as MFC
    (or .NET framework for that matter). The .NET versions of Delphi (or the
    C++/C# variants) can either use the winforms library (requires deployment of
    the full .NET runtime) or VCL.NET (which can run "self contained" and does
    not need a .NET runtime installed).

    Mixing MFC classes in with any of these version is ... unpleasent.

    [...]
     
  18. qrk

    qrk Guest

    I'd leave it installed. More and more programs are using .NET.
    Unfortunately, it's looking more like a MFC piece of crap with version
    problems. I recently ran across a program that required .NET 1.1, even
    if you had version 2 installed. Perhaps it's due to crappy programming
    that they required v1.1. I haven't seen any bad issues leaving it
    installed.
     
  19. Jim Thompson

    Jim Thompson Guest

    OK. I'll leave it. (It's v1.1)

    ...Jim Thompson
     
  20. Jamie

    Jamie Guest

    Sorry it's not.
    but that doesn't mean it's any good either.
    Bad comment to make, Borland apps have nothing to do with security
    issues, it's the people writing the code and that's where the problem
    is. .NET Robust? i don't think so. Cripple and slow ? yes/.
    Microsoft loves people like you, easy brain washing.
    Sorry, you don't know what you're talking about. Now you may be
    talking about the VCL. That is Borlands class library and it has no
    MFC what's so ever.

    Before going off on a tangent, I suggest you get the
    facts straight.
     
Ask a Question
Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?
You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.
Electronics Point Logo
Continue to site
Quote of the day

-