|
dev
newsgroups
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Versions of .net + visual studioI have vs2003 + framework v1.1. I would like to use the new serialport class that comes with v2.0 but just can't find a definitive explanation of visual studio and .net versions. Can I install v2.0 for use with my vs2003 or must I / should I upgrade to vs2005? Do all versions need installation on a pc for backwards compatability for apps? For example, for compatability I may need to keep v1.1 + 2.0 installed. v3.0 is out already. Is .net creating the same legasy issues it is supposed to solve? I know there is a class library using P/Invoke for v1.0, but I would like to take advantage of the dedicated .net class not an external work around, and besides there is a broader philosophical issue that applies generally - I should be trying to run the latest versions of software, and see the advantages of .net, but where does this lead after 10 more generational versions are released...? Thanks in advance for comments. swas swas wrote:
> Hi, It's easy: Visual Studio supports only the version of .NET that shipped > > I have vs2003 + framework v1.1. I would like to use the new > serialport class that comes with v2.0 but just can't find a > definitive explanation of visual studio and .net versions. with it: 2002 - .NET 1.0 2003 - .NET 1.1 2005 - .NET 2.0 > You need to upgrade to VS2005 to use .NET 2.0.> Can I install v2.0 for use with my vs2003 or must I / should I > upgrade to vs2005? > Do all versions need installation on a pc for backwards compatability You generally don't need to hold onto older versions - 1.1 apps should run > for apps? For example, for compatability I may need to keep v1.1 + > 2.0 installed. v3.0 is out already. Is .net creating the same legasy > issues it is supposed to solve? fine on the 2.0 framework. There's bound to be some exceptions. The recently named ".NET 3.0" does not include new versions of the CLR or the BCL, so 2.0 apps will absolutely run on "3.0". > I know there is a class library using P/Invoke for v1.0, but I would Time will tell.> like to take advantage of the dedicated .net class not an external > work around, and besides there is a broader philosophical issue that > applies generally - I should be trying to run the latest versions of > software, and see the advantages of .net, but where does this lead > after 10 more generational versions are released...? -cd ..NET Frameworks are designed to install/run side by side, and in general,
the later version will "compatible to former version, meaning, app made on earlier version would run on a computer with later version of .NET Framework only in most cases, unless the app uses some features in earlier version, which has been dropped later version. Of course, it is not 100% guaranteed that an app will run under later version of .NET, you must fully test it yourself. The only way to fully ensure .NET app to run is the have it run under the .NET version it is developed. This is how side-by-side installtion/coexistence comes in. Installing later version of .ENT Framework does not "update/upgrade/replace" earlier version, it simply install new version in different location of the computer. VS is tied to specific .NET Framework: VS2002->1.0; VS2003->1.1 and VS2005->2.0. Although there is some trick way that may enable you to use VS with non-targeted .NET framework, in general, you need corresponding VS to work the .NET version you choose. Again. different version of VS can be installed on the same computer peacefully. ..NET 3.0 is not out yet. 10 more generations of .NET on a box? There is possibility, of course, but would not be common, unless you have to run apps on the box built on every version of .NET framework in the span of about 20 years, considering many apps would run under later version of .NET. If you want to user pure .NET class for serialport, not third party code, not P/Invoce, you need .NET2.0 and VS2005 and the app will not run on box where only .NET1.x installed. Show quote "swas" <s***@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message news:A88BBC39-C34D-4F6F-92E9-FE13BCA56307@microsoft.com... > Hi, > > I have vs2003 + framework v1.1. I would like to use the new serialport > class > that comes with v2.0 but just can't find a definitive explanation of > visual > studio and .net versions. > > Can I install v2.0 for use with my vs2003 or must I / should I upgrade to > vs2005? > > Do all versions need installation on a pc for backwards compatability for > apps? For example, for compatability I may need to keep v1.1 + 2.0 > installed. > v3.0 is out already. Is .net creating the same legasy issues it is > supposed > to solve? > > I know there is a class library using P/Invoke for v1.0, but I would like > to > take advantage of the dedicated .net class not an external work around, > and > besides there is a broader philosophical issue that applies generally - I > should be trying to run the latest versions of software, and see the > advantages of .net, but where does this lead after 10 more generational > versions are released...? > > Thanks in advance for comments. > > swas Thanks for the quick and informative responses.
It makes sense, but I'm still unsure how this all pans out in the future - and at $850Au for an upgrade to vs2005 for a passing interest in programming, makes the latest software a little exclusive. Especially when vs2003 has only been used for 12 months or so... But I suppose that's all part of the M$ masterplan... Regards swas Show quote "Norman Yuan" wrote: > ..NET Frameworks are designed to install/run side by side, and in general, > the later version will "compatible to former version, meaning, app made on > earlier version would run on a computer with later version of .NET Framework > only in most cases, unless the app uses some features in earlier version, > which has been dropped later version. Of course, it is not 100% guaranteed > that an app will run under later version of .NET, you must fully test it > yourself. The only way to fully ensure .NET app to run is the have it run > under the .NET version it is developed. This is how side-by-side > installtion/coexistence comes in. > > Installing later version of .ENT Framework does not "update/upgrade/replace" > earlier version, it simply install new version in different location of the > computer. > > VS is tied to specific .NET Framework: VS2002->1.0; VS2003->1.1 and > VS2005->2.0. Although there is some trick way that may enable you to use VS > with non-targeted .NET framework, in general, you need corresponding VS to > work the .NET version you choose. Again. different version of VS can be > installed on the same computer peacefully. > > ..NET 3.0 is not out yet. 10 more generations of .NET on a box? There is > possibility, of course, but would not be common, unless you have to run apps > on the box built on every version of .NET framework in the span of about 20 > years, considering many apps would run under later version of .NET. > > If you want to user pure .NET class for serialport, not third party code, > not P/Invoce, you need .NET2.0 and VS2005 and the app will not run on box > where only .NET1.x installed. > > "swas" <s***@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message > news:A88BBC39-C34D-4F6F-92E9-FE13BCA56307@microsoft.com... > > Hi, > > > > I have vs2003 + framework v1.1. I would like to use the new serialport > > class > > that comes with v2.0 but just can't find a definitive explanation of > > visual > > studio and .net versions. > > > > Can I install v2.0 for use with my vs2003 or must I / should I upgrade to > > vs2005? > > > > Do all versions need installation on a pc for backwards compatability for > > apps? For example, for compatability I may need to keep v1.1 + 2.0 > > installed. > > v3.0 is out already. Is .net creating the same legasy issues it is > > supposed > > to solve? > > > > I know there is a class library using P/Invoke for v1.0, but I would like > > to > > take advantage of the dedicated .net class not an external work around, > > and > > besides there is a broader philosophical issue that applies generally - I > > should be trying to run the latest versions of software, and see the > > advantages of .net, but where does this lead after 10 more generational > > versions are released...? > > > > Thanks in advance for comments. > > > > swas > > > 1. You don't have to spend $850. Use one of the Express editions instead.
They are free. 2. You sound like an idiot using "M$" (even moreso, given the express editions are free). Show quote "swas" <s***@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message news:ED3FA409-FA2E-47C4-A000-6B48FFEE5D09@microsoft.com... > Thanks for the quick and informative responses. > > It makes sense, but I'm still unsure how this all pans out in the future - > and at $850Au for an upgrade to vs2005 for a passing interest in > programming, > makes the latest software a little exclusive. Especially when vs2003 has > only > been used for 12 months or so... > > But I suppose that's all part of the M$ masterplan... > > Regards > > swas > > "Norman Yuan" wrote: > >> ..NET Frameworks are designed to install/run side by side, and in >> general, >> the later version will "compatible to former version, meaning, app made >> on >> earlier version would run on a computer with later version of .NET >> Framework >> only in most cases, unless the app uses some features in earlier version, >> which has been dropped later version. Of course, it is not 100% >> guaranteed >> that an app will run under later version of .NET, you must fully test it >> yourself. The only way to fully ensure .NET app to run is the have it run >> under the .NET version it is developed. This is how side-by-side >> installtion/coexistence comes in. >> >> Installing later version of .ENT Framework does not >> "update/upgrade/replace" >> earlier version, it simply install new version in different location of >> the >> computer. >> >> VS is tied to specific .NET Framework: VS2002->1.0; VS2003->1.1 and >> VS2005->2.0. Although there is some trick way that may enable you to use >> VS >> with non-targeted .NET framework, in general, you need corresponding VS >> to >> work the .NET version you choose. Again. different version of VS can be >> installed on the same computer peacefully. >> >> ..NET 3.0 is not out yet. 10 more generations of .NET on a box? There is >> possibility, of course, but would not be common, unless you have to run >> apps >> on the box built on every version of .NET framework in the span of about >> 20 >> years, considering many apps would run under later version of .NET. >> >> If you want to user pure .NET class for serialport, not third party code, >> not P/Invoce, you need .NET2.0 and VS2005 and the app will not run on box >> where only .NET1.x installed. >> >> "swas" <s***@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message >> news:A88BBC39-C34D-4F6F-92E9-FE13BCA56307@microsoft.com... >> > Hi, >> > >> > I have vs2003 + framework v1.1. I would like to use the new serialport >> > class >> > that comes with v2.0 but just can't find a definitive explanation of >> > visual >> > studio and .net versions. >> > >> > Can I install v2.0 for use with my vs2003 or must I / should I upgrade >> > to >> > vs2005? >> > >> > Do all versions need installation on a pc for backwards compatability >> > for >> > apps? For example, for compatability I may need to keep v1.1 + 2.0 >> > installed. >> > v3.0 is out already. Is .net creating the same legasy issues it is >> > supposed >> > to solve? >> > >> > I know there is a class library using P/Invoke for v1.0, but I would >> > like >> > to >> > take advantage of the dedicated .net class not an external work around, >> > and >> > besides there is a broader philosophical issue that applies generally - >> > I >> > should be trying to run the latest versions of software, and see the >> > advantages of .net, but where does this lead after 10 more generational >> > versions are released...? >> > >> > Thanks in advance for comments. >> > >> > swas >> >> >> Depending on what you do, you have choice of free .NET development tool to
different edition of VisualStudio (with different price tag). Theoretically, you do not spend a penny to develop .NET app: you only need ..NET SDK and any text editor, like NotePad. Of course you want to be a bit more productive, so you can get VS Express for free (for .NET2.0 only though) or you can download very good .NET IDE "Sharp Developer" for all different .NET version. If you are dedicated/professional .NET developer, the cost of VS Profrssional is quite reasonable, compare the time you would put into .NET developing. Show quote "swas" <s***@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message news:ED3FA409-FA2E-47C4-A000-6B48FFEE5D09@microsoft.com... > Thanks for the quick and informative responses. > > It makes sense, but I'm still unsure how this all pans out in the future - > and at $850Au for an upgrade to vs2005 for a passing interest in > programming, > makes the latest software a little exclusive. Especially when vs2003 has > only > been used for 12 months or so... > > But I suppose that's all part of the M$ masterplan... > > Regards > > swas > > "Norman Yuan" wrote: > >> ..NET Frameworks are designed to install/run side by side, and in >> general, >> the later version will "compatible to former version, meaning, app made >> on >> earlier version would run on a computer with later version of .NET >> Framework >> only in most cases, unless the app uses some features in earlier version, >> which has been dropped later version. Of course, it is not 100% >> guaranteed >> that an app will run under later version of .NET, you must fully test it >> yourself. The only way to fully ensure .NET app to run is the have it run >> under the .NET version it is developed. This is how side-by-side >> installtion/coexistence comes in. >> >> Installing later version of .ENT Framework does not >> "update/upgrade/replace" >> earlier version, it simply install new version in different location of >> the >> computer. >> >> VS is tied to specific .NET Framework: VS2002->1.0; VS2003->1.1 and >> VS2005->2.0. Although there is some trick way that may enable you to use >> VS >> with non-targeted .NET framework, in general, you need corresponding VS >> to >> work the .NET version you choose. Again. different version of VS can be >> installed on the same computer peacefully. >> >> ..NET 3.0 is not out yet. 10 more generations of .NET on a box? There is >> possibility, of course, but would not be common, unless you have to run >> apps >> on the box built on every version of .NET framework in the span of about >> 20 >> years, considering many apps would run under later version of .NET. >> >> If you want to user pure .NET class for serialport, not third party code, >> not P/Invoce, you need .NET2.0 and VS2005 and the app will not run on box >> where only .NET1.x installed. >> >> "swas" <s***@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message >> news:A88BBC39-C34D-4F6F-92E9-FE13BCA56307@microsoft.com... >> > Hi, >> > >> > I have vs2003 + framework v1.1. I would like to use the new serialport >> > class >> > that comes with v2.0 but just can't find a definitive explanation of >> > visual >> > studio and .net versions. >> > >> > Can I install v2.0 for use with my vs2003 or must I / should I upgrade >> > to >> > vs2005? >> > >> > Do all versions need installation on a pc for backwards compatability >> > for >> > apps? For example, for compatability I may need to keep v1.1 + 2.0 >> > installed. >> > v3.0 is out already. Is .net creating the same legasy issues it is >> > supposed >> > to solve? >> > >> > I know there is a class library using P/Invoke for v1.0, but I would >> > like >> > to >> > take advantage of the dedicated .net class not an external work around, >> > and >> > besides there is a broader philosophical issue that applies generally - >> > I >> > should be trying to run the latest versions of software, and see the >> > advantages of .net, but where does this lead after 10 more generational >> > versions are released...? >> > >> > Thanks in advance for comments. >> > >> > swas >> >> >>  |
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Other interesting topics