StackPanel for .Net 2.0

Hi,

is there something like a StackPanel from WPF for the normal Windows
Forms Library?
I have to update a .Net 2.0 Application with a better User Interface,
but .Net3.5 is not possible,
because the application has to run on Windows 2000.

Thanks, for your help,

Andre

Pavel
Wed Aug 13 07:03:05 CDT 2008

On Aug 13, 3:48=A0pm, Rotlaus <rotl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> is there something like a StackPanel from WPF for the normal Windows
> Forms Library?
> I have to update a .Net 2.0 Application with a better User Interface,
> but .Net3.5 is not possible,
> because the application has to run on Windows 2000.

FlowLayoutPanel is probably the closest (just don't forget to set
AutoSize to true, and AutoSizeMode to GrowAndShrink), though single-
column/row TableLayoutPanel can also be used. All in all, though,
WinForms layouts are a pain to work with (particularly from within the
visual editor).

Rotlaus
Wed Aug 13 07:15:25 CDT 2008

On 13 Aug., 14:03, Pavel Minaev <int...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Aug 13, 3:48=A0pm, Rotlaus <rotl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > is there something like a StackPanel from WPF for the normal Windows
> > Forms Library?
> > I have to update a .Net 2.0 Application with a better User Interface,
> > but .Net3.5 is not possible,
> > because the application has to run on Windows 2000.
>
> FlowLayoutPanel is probably the closest (just don't forget to set
> AutoSize to true, and AutoSizeMode to GrowAndShrink), though single-
> column/row TableLayoutPanel can also be used. All in all, though,
> WinForms layouts are a pain to work with (particularly from within the
> visual editor).

I would love to use Xaml and WPF, but as there is this requirement
for
Win2000 i have no choice.

Alex
Wed Aug 13 15:24:37 CDT 2008

>>I would love to use Xaml and WPF, but as there is this requirement
>>for
>>Win2000 i have no choice.

Are you sure 3.5 isn't supported on Windows 2000? I haven't seen the system
requirements for it, but I'm relatively certain that Silverlight 2.0 is
going to be Win2K compatible, so I'd be surprised if 3.5 isn't.

Henning
Wed Aug 13 15:43:15 CDT 2008

Hi,

.NET 3.0 and .NET 3.5 are definitely not supported on W2k.

Kind regards,
Henning Krause

"Alex Clark" <quanta@noemail.noemail> wrote in message
news:ujNdgKY$IHA.792@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>>>I would love to use Xaml and WPF, but as there is this requirement
>>>for
>>>Win2000 i have no choice.
>
> Are you sure 3.5 isn't supported on Windows 2000? I haven't seen the
> system requirements for it, but I'm relatively certain that Silverlight
> 2.0 is going to be Win2K compatible, so I'd be surprised if 3.5 isn't.
>

Pavel
Thu Aug 14 01:34:36 CDT 2008

On Aug 14, 12:24=A0am, "Alex Clark" <qua...@noemail.noemail> wrote:
> >>I would love to use Xaml and WPF, but as there is this requirement
> >>for
> >>Win2000 i have no choice.
>
> Are you sure 3.5 isn't supported on Windows 2000? =A0I haven't seen the s=
ystem
> requirements for it, but I'm relatively certain that Silverlight 2.0 is
> going to be Win2K compatible, so I'd be surprised if 3.5 isn't.

Silverlight is not .NET 3.5, it has its own version of the runtime.
3.5 requires XP as a minimum. One can install 2.0 SP1 or SP2 (which
are parts of 3.5 and 3.5 SP1, respectively) on Win2K, but they don't
include any of the 3.x bits.