Getting 3.0 Facts Straight

2 May 2007 6:42 PM

sloan

Ok.

If anybody has a url , that'd be great.

My IT Department is asking for the exact lowdown on 3.0, from a machine/OS
perspective.

3.0 projects can be

developed on
    a. XP SP2
    b. Vista
    c. ( I guess 2003Server, but how uses that as their personal OS)

and deployed on
    2003Server
    (some future version of Vista)

Oh man. I know I screwed that up somehow.

I found a few blogs, but would like group help with the concrete facts with
this one.

2 May 2007 8:29 PM

Andy

Show quote Hide quote

On May 2, 2:42 pm, "sloan" <s***@ipass.net> wrote:
> Ok.
>
> If anybody has a url , that'd be great.
>
> My IT Department is asking for the exact lowdown on 3.0, from a machine/OS
> perspective.
>
> 3.0 projects can be
>
> developed on
>     a. XP SP2
>     b. Vista
>     c. ( I guess 2003Server, but how uses that as their personal OS)
>
> and deployed on
>     2003Server
>     (some future version of Vista)
>
> Oh man. I know I screwed that up somehow.
>
> I found a few blogs, but would like group help with the concrete facts with
> this one.

It is already deployed on all versions of Vista, and can be deployed
to WinXP SP2. Check out the system requirements:

http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?familyid=10CC340B-F857-4A14-83F5-25634C3BF043&displaylang=en

2 May 2007 8:29 PM

Andy

Show quote Hide quote

On May 2, 2:42 pm, "sloan" <s***@ipass.net> wrote:
> Ok.
>
> If anybody has a url , that'd be great.
>
> My IT Department is asking for the exact lowdown on 3.0, from a machine/OS
> perspective.
>
> 3.0 projects can be
>
> developed on
>     a. XP SP2
>     b. Vista
>     c. ( I guess 2003Server, but how uses that as their personal OS)
>
> and deployed on
>     2003Server
>     (some future version of Vista)
>
> Oh man. I know I screwed that up somehow.
>
> I found a few blogs, but would like group help with the concrete facts with
> this one.

OH yes.. your development assumptions are correct.

2 May 2007 9:24 PM

sloan

Thanks

Show quoteHide quote

"Andy" <an***@med-associates.com> wrote in message
news:1178137778.544257.292810@n76g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> On May 2, 2:42 pm, "sloan" <s***@ipass.net> wrote:
> > Ok.
> >
> > If anybody has a url , that'd be great.
> >
> > My IT Department is asking for the exact lowdown on 3.0, from a
machine/OS
> > perspective.
> >
> > 3.0 projects can be
> >
> > developed on
> >     a. XP SP2
> >     b. Vista
> >     c. ( I guess 2003Server, but who uses that as their personal OS)
> >
> > and deployed on
> >     2003Server
> >     (some future version of Vista)
> >
> > Oh man. I know I screwed that up somehow.
> >
> > I found a few blogs, but would like group help with the concrete facts
with
> > this one.
>
> OH yes.. your development assumptions are correct.
>

2 May 2007 8:37 PM

Göran_Andersson

sloan wrote:
Show quoteHide quote

> Ok.
>
> If anybody has a url , that'd be great.
>
> My IT Department is asking for the exact lowdown on 3.0, from a machine/OS
> perspective.
>
> 3.0 projects can be
>
> developed on
>     a. XP SP2
>     b. Vista
>     c. ( I guess 2003Server, but how uses that as their personal OS)
>
> and deployed on
>     2003Server
>     (some future version of Vista)
>
>
>
> Oh man. I know I screwed that up somehow.
>
> I found a few blogs, but would like group help with the concrete facts with
> this one.
>

Giving the release the version number 3.0 has caused a lot of confusion.
2.5 would have been a more fitting version number.

..NET Framework 3.0 is just framework 2.0 with WinFX, there are no
changes in the framework itself. The real framework 3.0 will not be
available until .NET Framework 3.5.

--
Göran Andersson
_____
http://www.guffa.com

2 May 2007 9:21 PM

sloan

//

> Giving the release the version number 3.0 has caused a lot of confusion.
> 2.5 would have been a more fitting version number.
//

Yeah, I got that part of it.

But I can develop and deploy 2.0 code on win2000.

I'll use your hint "with WinFX" to find some more info as well.

Thanks for the hints.

Show quoteHide quote

"Göran Andersson" <gu***@guffa.com> wrote in message
news:OFEpGnPjHHA.4188@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> sloan wrote:
> > Ok.
> >
> > If anybody has a url , that'd be great.
> >
> > My IT Department is asking for the exact lowdown on 3.0, from a
machine/OS
> > perspective.
> >
> > 3.0 projects can be
> >
> > developed on
> >     a. XP SP2
> >     b. Vista
> >     c. ( I guess 2003Server, but how uses that as their personal OS)
> >
> > and deployed on
> >     2003Server
> >     (some future version of Vista)
> >
> >
> >
> > Oh man. I know I screwed that up somehow.
> >
> > I found a few blogs, but would like group help with the concrete facts
with
> > this one.
> >
>
> Giving the release the version number 3.0 has caused a lot of confusion.
> 2.5 would have been a more fitting version number.
>
> .NET Framework 3.0 is just framework 2.0 with WinFX, there are no
> changes in the framework itself. The real framework 3.0 will not be
> available until .NET Framework 3.5.
>
> --
> Göran Andersson
> _____
> http://www.guffa.com