Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
HomeAnnouncementsFree MagazinesWhite PapersSubmit Content
Discussion GroupsASP.NETWindows FormsLanguages.NET FrameworkVisual Studio.NET
Articles.NET FrameworkASP.NETToolsWindows Forms
.NET DirectoryOpen Source ProjectsUser GroupsWeb Resources
Related Topics
Visual Basic 6SQL ServerMS AccessOther DB ProductsMS Server ProductsMore Topics ...

.NET Forum / .NET Framework / New Users / October 2007

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Can a .NET 1.1 app run on a PC which have .NET 2.0 installed only?

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
albusmw - 23 Oct 2007 08:40 GMT
Hello,

I have a questions regarding the issue "Does .NET 2.0 contain .NET
1.1":

We want to install .NET on a machine that has only 1 GByte Flash
Harddisc. At the moment, there are developement teams that already
have Visual Studio 2005 and use .NET 2.0 language features, but also
teams that still use Visual Studio 2003 and thus generate .NET 1.1
assemblies, but both develope for the same target.

The question is:
If the target machine has only .NET Framework 2.0 installed, will any
assembly compiled for .NET 1.1 run on this machine?

Best regards,

Martin.
Andrew Faust - 23 Oct 2007 09:00 GMT
No. You need to have both installed.

Signature

Andrew Faust
andrew[at]andrewfaust.com
http://www.andrewfaust.com

> Hello,
>
[quoted text clipped - 14 lines]
>
> Martin.
Martin Weiss - 23 Oct 2007 09:24 GMT
Hello Andrew,

I tried the described scenario with a simple command line application and
this worked well ...
So is this just random ?????

Best regards,

Martin.

> No. You need to have both installed.
>
[quoted text clipped - 16 lines]
>>
>> Martin.
Norman Yuan - 23 Oct 2007 15:39 GMT
No, you do not need both version of .NET framework, at least in most cases.

That is, .NET 1.x applications will run on .NET2.0 only machine, unless the
1.x app specifically used something only available in .NET 1.x (almost none,
.NET2.0 still support features in 1.x that are depreciated). So, in most
cases, 1.x app would just run fine. However, if the application is
complicated, you may need to do thorough test, or to play it safe, just
install 1.x framework. After all, the .NET framework is designed to
install/run side by side (so far until 2.0. After the messy version naming
of 3.0, and coming 3.5, the version and side-by-side thing is becoming more
and more confusing).

> No. You need to have both installed.
>
[quoted text clipped - 16 lines]
>>
>> Martin.
Andrew Faust - 23 Oct 2007 17:49 GMT
Interesting. I hadn't realized that as I'm constantly running in to issues on
new installs of windows that only have .Net 2.0 where some app requires me to
install .Net 1.1

With how frequently I hit this issue, I thought MS had kept the frameworks
distinct.

Andrew Faust

> No, you do not need both version of .NET framework, at least in most cases.
>
[quoted text clipped - 28 lines]
> >>
> >> Martin.
Norman Yuan - 23 Oct 2007 18:54 GMT
The only thing I had run into to use app built on 1.1 with computer having
.NET2.0 only is the installation, since in the 1.1 app's setup package I
included the dependency to 1.1. So when I ran setup of the 1.1 app, it stops
the installation and ask to install 1.1 framework. If I do Xcopy to that 1.1
app to 2.0 only computer, it just runs.

If 1.x not runs on 2.0 only computer, then MS would have big trouble since
Vista is 2.0 pre-installed only (of course you can install 1.x on it, but
for most users, it is not needed for sure to run 1.1 applications).

> Interesting. I hadn't realized that as I'm constantly running in to issues
> on
[quoted text clipped - 44 lines]
>> >>
>> >> Martin.
Giorgio - 24 Oct 2007 08:42 GMT
> If the target machine has only .NET Framework 2.0 installed, will any
> assembly compiled for .NET 1.1 run on this machine?

Probably in "most cases".
I have recently installed on Windows Vista a desktop application based upon .net
1.1 and developed and tested on winXp. It seemd to run well but I had problems
with some procedures (say 1%) and using Crystal Reports (version included in
vs2003). Installing .net 1.1 on Vista removed all the problems :-)

Bye
Giorgio
Martin Weiss - 24 Oct 2007 18:55 GMT
Hi all,

thanks for the replies.
I am most programming with the basic classes only, so I do not use database
access, web applications, ... (we do algorithm design and such things).
So I do not expect any problems here.

Best regards,

Martin.

>> If the target machine has only .NET Framework 2.0 installed, will any
>> assembly compiled for .NET 1.1 run on this machine?
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
> Bye
> Giorgio

Free Magazines

Get 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 ...

Oracle MagazineNetwork ComputingComputer WorldBio-IT WorldeWeekInformation WeekInfosecurity
 
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.