1) Does .NET framework ship standard on certain versions of Windows?

2) The reason for the question is that I wrote an internet explorer browser helper object in C# using Visual Studio 2003. Since I used .NET, which versions of Window can I run it on?

3) Do my users have to install the .NET framework to run my browser helper object?

Re: .NET Compatibility by Jochen

Jochen
Thu May 06 12:30:33 CDT 2004

=?Utf-8?B?RG9qbw==?= wrote:

> 1) Does .NET framework ship standard on certain versions of Windows?

None.

> 2) The reason for the question is that I wrote an internet explorer
> browser helper object in C# using Visual Studio 2003. Since I used
> .NET, which versions of Window can I run it on?

On all that support .NET 1.1

> 3) Do my users have to install the .NET framework to run my browser
> helper object?

Yes.


--
Greetings
Jochen

Do you need a memory-leak finder ?
http://www.codeproject.com/tools/leakfinder.asp

Do you need daily reports from your server?
http://sourceforge.net/projects/srvreport/

Re: .NET Compatibility by Christopher

Christopher
Thu May 06 12:51:00 CDT 2004

The only version that has the .NET framework installed by default is Windows
Server 2003, I believe it has version 1.1 installed.
The .NET framework shiped several months after XP, I think XP can detect
.NET assemblies but cannot run them.

The .NET framework has to be installed on machines in order to run .NET
code.

Chris

"Dojo" <anonymous@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:8073D451-AC05-4693-B887-70C713A192FA@microsoft.com...
> 1) Does .NET framework ship standard on certain versions of Windows?
>
> 2) The reason for the question is that I wrote an internet explorer
browser helper object in C# using Visual Studio 2003. Since I used .NET,
which versions of Window can I run it on?
>
> 3) Do my users have to install the .NET framework to run my browser helper
object?



Re: .NET Compatibility by Mark

Mark
Thu May 06 13:22:52 CDT 2004

XP can run .NET assemblies -in fact I develop using FW 1.1 /Visual Studio
2003 on an XP box.
You still have to install the framework/s though. Believe you are correct
with regards to Server 2003.

p.s. any machine that the Framework can install on can run .net assemblies.
Although what runs will probably depend upon how much the assembly deviates
from the Core Framework. e.g. System.Windows namespace is specific to Win 32
so assemblies using this could only run on OS' using Win32.

--


Br,
Mark Broadbent
mcdba , mcse+i
=============
"Christopher Kimbell" <a@b.c> wrote in message
news:409a7900@news.broadpark.no...
> The only version that has the .NET framework installed by default is
Windows
> Server 2003, I believe it has version 1.1 installed.
> The .NET framework shiped several months after XP, I think XP can detect
> .NET assemblies but cannot run them.
>
> The .NET framework has to be installed on machines in order to run .NET
> code.
>
> Chris
>
> "Dojo" <anonymous@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:8073D451-AC05-4693-B887-70C713A192FA@microsoft.com...
> > 1) Does .NET framework ship standard on certain versions of Windows?
> >
> > 2) The reason for the question is that I wrote an internet explorer
> browser helper object in C# using Visual Studio 2003. Since I used .NET,
> which versions of Window can I run it on?
> >
> > 3) Do my users have to install the .NET framework to run my browser
helper
> object?
>
>



Re: .NET Compatibility by Jon

Jon
Thu May 06 13:35:09 CDT 2004

Mark Broadbent <no-spam-please@no-spam-please.com> wrote:
> XP can run .NET assemblies -in fact I develop using FW 1.1 /Visual Studio
> 2003 on an XP box.

I believe Christopher was actually saying that without the framework
installed, XP can detect a .NET executable and tell the user that it
requires .NET - this is better than earlier versions of Windows, which
just give cryptic error messages.

--
Jon Skeet - <skeet@pobox.com>
http://www.pobox.com/~skeet
If replying to the group, please do not mail me too

Re: .NET Compatibility by Mark

Mark
Thu May 06 15:09:11 CDT 2004

quite clever this windows XP gadget thingamy ;)
Thx for clearing that one up -see what he meant now.

--

--

Br,
Mark Broadbent
mcdba , mcse+i
=============
"Jon Skeet [C# MVP]" <skeet@pobox.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.1b0495b4c756131798a86d@msnews.microsoft.com...
> Mark Broadbent <no-spam-please@no-spam-please.com> wrote:
> > XP can run .NET assemblies -in fact I develop using FW 1.1 /Visual
Studio
> > 2003 on an XP box.
>
> I believe Christopher was actually saying that without the framework
> installed, XP can detect a .NET executable and tell the user that it
> requires .NET - this is better than earlier versions of Windows, which
> just give cryptic error messages.
>
> --
> Jon Skeet - <skeet@pobox.com>
> http://www.pobox.com/~skeet
> If replying to the group, please do not mail me too



Re: .NET Compatibility by Christopher

Christopher
Fri May 07 12:37:33 CDT 2004

My point was that no versions except 2003 server has the framework installed
out of the box, it has to be installed at some later date.
The .NET system requirements is located here:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/netframework/technologyinfo/sysreqs/default.aspx


Regarding the statement about XP recognizing .NET assemblies. The book
"Applied Microsoft .NET Framework Programming" by
J Richter has a detailed description about how .NET assemblies are loaded.
Previous versions than XP requires some extra step in the load procedure
compared to XP.

Chris


"Mark Broadbent" <no-spam-please@no-spam-please.com> wrote in message
news:OcTH9X6MEHA.1608@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> quite clever this windows XP gadget thingamy ;)
> Thx for clearing that one up -see what he meant now.
>
> --
>
> --
>
> Br,
> Mark Broadbent
> mcdba , mcse+i
> =============
> "Jon Skeet [C# MVP]" <skeet@pobox.com> wrote in message
> news:MPG.1b0495b4c756131798a86d@msnews.microsoft.com...
> > Mark Broadbent <no-spam-please@no-spam-please.com> wrote:
> > > XP can run .NET assemblies -in fact I develop using FW 1.1 /Visual
> Studio
> > > 2003 on an XP box.
> >
> > I believe Christopher was actually saying that without the framework
> > installed, XP can detect a .NET executable and tell the user that it
> > requires .NET - this is better than earlier versions of Windows, which
> > just give cryptic error messages.
> >
> > --
> > Jon Skeet - <skeet@pobox.com>
> > http://www.pobox.com/~skeet
> > If replying to the group, please do not mail me too
>
>