 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
.NET Forum / .NET Framework / New Users / January 2006Bone head decision: .NET 2.0 Not For Windows XP Pro SP1
The simple plan was to upgrade from VS 2003 Pro to VS 2005 Pro for $500. Unfortunately, my three-year-old XP Pro SP1 laptop did not take kindly to SP2 required for .NET 2.0. Ironically, .NET 2.0 still supports Windows 98 - go figure. The new plan, just initiated, has escalated to a mere $3,001.36 which covers the new computer plus VS 2005 Pro with the MSDN Pro subscription that includes an operating system (Windows Server 2003) that does support .NET 2.0. In all fairness, Windows Server 2003 was on the purchase list for 2006 but not right after Christmas and just before the 4/15 tax day. The purpose of this post is for two reasons: 1) I'm really ticked off for being forced by Microsoft to spend the extra $2,500 to stay current. Now that I've said it, I feel better and can move on emotionally. 2) The real reason - right now, "Smart Client" applications developed with VS 2005 will not be compatible with a significant number of XP Pro systems. How do we deal with this issue and, more importantly, why has Microsoft put us in this position in the first place? Your thoughts, I think you should read this. http://blogs.msdn.com/brada/archive/2006/01/16/513018.aspx Thank you for pointing me to the discussion thread concerning XP and SP1. From a business perspective, I'll let the client decide which Framework they want to use. If they do want to go with the newer technology, it will only be with the understanding that XP/SP1 will not be supported. For those that think installing SP2 is a slam dunk, just be forewarned. It's not. But for those thinking that an XP box with SP1 is going to give you major trouble when you go to SP2, it shouldn't. > Thank you for pointing me to the discussion thread concerning XP and > SP1. From a business perspective, I'll let the client decide which [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > *** Sent via Developersdex http://www.developersdex.com *** No it shouldn't, unless the upgrade freezes and leaves the system in "an inconsistent state" that only allows for a reboot in "Safe Mode". In my case, the installation of SP2 requires wiping the hard drive and spending two days reinstalling everything. For a three-year-old laptop, which by the way is well protected with anti-virus software, Zone Alarm Pro and is hidden behind a hardware firewall, it's not worth it. My PC was not singled out. A major insurance company in the area had significant problems with a number of their PCs when upgrading to SP2. From personal experience and other anecdotal evidence I'm telling my clients that upgrading to SP2 probably will work but there is a possibility that it might not. They can weigh the evidence and make a business decision concerning .NET 2.0 and its requirements. I've put my money where my mouth is and am going forward with VS 2005 and .NET 2.0. > But for those thinking that an XP box with SP1 is going to give you major > trouble when you go to SP2, it shouldn't. [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > > > *** Sent via Developersdex http://www.developersdex.com *** > In my case, the installation of SP2 requires wiping the hard drive and > spending two days reinstalling everything. For a three-year-old laptop, > which by the way is well protected with anti-virus software, Zone Alarm > Pro > and is hidden behind a hardware firewall, it's not worth it. It is entirely possible that Zone Alarm or anti-virus software is preventing certain things from happening when installing the Service Pack.  SignatureHTH, Kevin Spencer Microsoft MVP .Net Developer You can lead a fish to a bicycle, but it takes a very long time, and the bicycle has to *want* to change. > No it shouldn't, unless the upgrade freezes and leaves the system in "an > inconsistent state" that only allows for a reboot in "Safe Mode". [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] >> > >> > *** Sent via Developersdex http://www.developersdex.com *** FYI - I have several machines (XP Pro.) that are all about 3 years old as well (P4's, 2GHz, 1GB RAM) and these machines run ZA Pro. as well. I had no problems with any of them when I went to SP2. >> In my case, the installation of SP2 requires wiping the hard drive and >> spending two days reinstalling everything. For a three-year-old laptop, [quoted text clipped - 43 lines] >>> > >>> > *** Sent via Developersdex http://www.developersdex.com *** So it's 2 in the afternoon. You are sitting at the client site. Mary, the bookkeeper, is back from lunch and really needs to use her computer again. You call one of your friends who suggests uninstalling Zone Alarm to install SP2. Scott, drops by and says he had no problem with Zone Alarm. Meanwhile, the other 8 people in the department are happy because the upgrade went great for them. Of course, Mary's computer is toast because the only way you could even reboot to safe mode was to pull the plug. Then, you think back to the good old days of VB6 when the first dialog box you got when installing your app was "Your operating system is out of date. Would you like to continue the installation which will require a reboot of the system and, if your really lucky today, won't destroy the other mission critical applications on this computer - yes/no" Remember Lucy holding the football for Charlie Brown in the Peanuts cartoon? You know, she knows and Charlie knows what's going to happen a split second before the kick. Having the ball pulled once, I will never install SP2 on a client's computer. I'll let the poor "network" guy do that. Chances are it will install without a hitch but there is a possiblity he will be flat on his back swearing at Lucy. Personally, I'm really excited about VS 2005 and .Net 2.0: MTOM web services, binary serialization of datasets, compression, master web pages, cross page post backs and the list goes on. I just think it's unfortunate the security zealots have made the 2.0 sell more difficult then it needs to be. > FYI - I have several machines (XP Pro.) that are all about 3 years old as > well (P4's, 2GHz, 1GB RAM) and these machines run ZA Pro. as well. I had no [quoted text clipped - 47 lines] > >>> > > >>> > *** Sent via Developersdex http://www.developersdex.com *** > So it's 2 in the afternoon. You are sitting at the client site. Mary, the > bookkeeper, is back from lunch and really needs to use her computer again. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > upgrade went great for them. Of course, Mary's computer is toast because > the only way you could even reboot to safe mode was to pull the plug. And of course, I assume you *did* take a backup (preferably of the Ghost variety) before installing the (pretty major) service pack? <snip> SignatureJon Skeet - <skeet@pobox.com> http://www.pobox.com/~skeet Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/jon.skeet If replying to the group, please do not mail me too Hi Jon, In hindsight, that would have been really good. Microsoft support worked me through the rollback process to rid the system of the evil SP2 demons. For the next month it was flacky but after reinstalling various drivers and software it got better. Jim > > So it's 2 in the afternoon. You are sitting at the client site. Mary, the > > bookkeeper, is back from lunch and really needs to use her computer again. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > <snip> You feel better now Jim? Breathe buddy, breathe. I only posted again as an FYI since I am using ZA Pro. on XP Pro. machines that seem to be of the same age as yours. Just thought others reading this shouldn't be put off of SP2 just because they may have a system that matches your specs. I really suspect that the problems you've encounters are more likely related to the other software that was already on the system (not the OS itself) at the time of the upgrade attempt. It also doesn't sound like the age of the PC or its specs. were the issue either. IMHO -Scott > So it's 2 in the afternoon. You are sitting at the client site. Mary, the > bookkeeper, is back from lunch and really needs to use her computer again. [quoted text clipped - 92 lines] >> >>> > >> >>> > *** Sent via Developersdex http://www.developersdex.com *** Why? SP2 is a free downloadable service pack which should install without any problem on XP SP1. Willy. | The simple plan was to upgrade from VS 2003 Pro to VS 2005 Pro for $500. | Unfortunately, my three-year-old XP Pro SP1 laptop did not take kindly to [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] | | Your thoughts, I'm sorry, what exactly stops you from simply installing SP2 on to your current laptop with XP SP1? Best regards, Ilya This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights. *** Want to find answers instantly? Here's how... *** 1. Go to http://groups-beta.google.com/group/microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.compactfra mework?hl=en 2. Type your question in the text box near "Search this group" button. 3. Hit "Search this group" button. 4. Read answer(s). > The simple plan was to upgrade from VS 2003 Pro to VS 2005 Pro for $500. > Unfortunately, my three-year-old XP Pro SP1 laptop did not take kindly to [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > > Your thoughts, Why not just download .NET 2.0 as a stand-alone application via Windows Update [FREE]? > The simple plan was to upgrade from VS 2003 Pro to VS 2005 Pro for $500. > Unfortunately, my three-year-old XP Pro SP1 laptop did not take kindly to [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > > Your thoughts, > Unfortunately, my three-year-old XP Pro SP1 laptop did not take kindly to > SP2 required for .NET 2.0. I would have worked harder at getting XP SP2 to install. But come on, honestly, you were just looking for an excuse to get a new computer, weren't you. ;-) -- Alan If you want support for .NET 2.0 on your XP machine, you do need to upgrade to SP2. Thats a plain fact. Do you have any apps which you believe will not work on SP2? SignatureThanks Vipul Patel C# MVP www.microsoft.com/mvp Log bugs at http://msdn.microsoft.com/productfeedback > The simple plan was to upgrade from VS 2003 Pro to VS 2005 Pro for $500. > Unfortunately, my three-year-old XP Pro SP1 laptop did not take kindly to [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > > Your thoughts, > Unfortunately, my three-year-old XP Pro SP1 laptop did not take kindly to > SP2 required for .NET 2.0. If it were me, I would have reinstalled the O/S from scratch, since such an update failure is indicative of a messed up Windows install... With a blank machine with a fresh O/S XP SP2 should install very easily. ... That is, unless I'm looking for an excuse to get a new machine, that's when problems of this sort are more easily fixed by buying a new computer ;-). I take the side of those who think you used this subconsciosly to get a new machine you wanted... In which case you should really be thanking MS! After reading all these messages, I tend to agree that if an OS is still in support, especially mainstream support, but preferably in mainstream and extended support, any new development platform's runtime environment should be supported on this OS. This should include the development environment as well so we can test on this platform. Mike Ober. > The simple plan was to upgrade from VS 2003 Pro to VS 2005 Pro for $500. > Unfortunately, my three-year-old XP Pro SP1 laptop did not take kindly to [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > > Your thoughts, > The simple plan was to upgrade from VS 2003 Pro to VS 2005 Pro for $500. > Unfortunately, my three-year-old XP Pro SP1 laptop did not take kindly to [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > > Your thoughts, I've yet to read/hear about any *TECHNOLOGICAL* reason for the SP2 requirement -- I'm sure there is none. From the blog link that someone else posted: "Microsoft is making concerted efforts to ensure that systems are as secure as possible by default" http://blogs.msdn.com/brada/archive/2006/01/16/513018.aspx This statement is flat-out not true. It should read: Microsoft is making coercive efforts to give the appearance that systems are as secure as possible while maximizing profits at the expense of true security. I fail to see how insisting on SP2 makes them more money? Last I heard, SPs were free... Jevon >> The simple plan was to upgrade from VS 2003 Pro to VS 2005 Pro for $500. >> Unfortunately, my three-year-old XP Pro SP1 laptop did not take kindly to [quoted text clipped - 43 lines] > appearance that systems are as secure as possible while maximizing profits > at the expense of true security. > "Microsoft is making concerted efforts to ensure that systems are as > secure as possible by default" > http://blogs.msdn.com/brada/archive/2006/01/16/513018.aspx > > This statement is flat-out not true. I really don't think you have any factual merits to this statement. The simple fact that SP2 installs Windows Firewall and turns it on by default, negates your statement. > It should read: Microsoft is making coercive efforts to give the > appearance that systems are as secure as possible while maximizing profits > at the expense of true security. Do you think that the software engineers that developed, tested and rolled out SP2 did it on thier own time, without compensation. And, did you know that SP2 is free? Seems like you've just got a Microsoft "chip" on your shoulder and would rather spew out incorrect statements to ease your frustration than to actually say what's on your mind without making up stuff. Dude, just do the adult thing: Don't install the SP2 and deal with the consequences of your actions and inactions... We all do it every day. > 2) The real reason - right now, "Smart Client" applications developed > with VS 2005 will not be compatible with a significant number of XP > Pro systems. How do we deal with this issue and, more importantly, > why has Microsoft put us in this position in the first place? Well, my contribution is that I have a XPSP2 machine but only room for one version of VS so I uninstalled VS2003, installed VS2005 and then installed ActiveSync 4.1. Oh dear. It was only after doing that when I discovered that the compact framework 2.0 did not work on my (aging) iPaq 3630, so I cannot develop compact framework apps for my iPaq. Oh and ActiveSync 4.1 has removed some of the synchronization settings too :( Luckily I have another machine with VS2003 on it but it just goes to show that you should not be too hasty when upgrading your software. Richard SignatureFusion Tutorial: http://www.grimes.demon.co.uk/workshops/fusionWS.htm Security Tutorial: http://www.grimes.demon.co.uk/workshops/securityWS.htm Free MagazinesGet these publications absolutely FREE for up to 12 months. There are no hidden fees and no obligation. Simply choose a title, complete the application form and submit it. Read more ...
|
Reply to this Message
|
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.