.NET Framework ??

"Jim Thompson" wrote in message news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com...

Yes

No.

"Jim Thompson" wrote in message news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com...

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. ;-)

"Jim Thompson" wrote in message news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com...

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

I think .net is standard on an XP system.

John

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

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

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

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.

"Jim Thompson" wrote in message news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com...

You can uninstall it or leave it, its not doing any harm.

Cheers

not by itself, you might come across other software that uses it but by then you may need to upgrade it anyway

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.

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.

Removing and reinstalling software may lead to corruption.

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.

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

DNA

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.

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.

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

...Jim Thompson

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.