I know that XP didn't ship with a version of .NET Framework and I'm fairly certain that .NET 2.0 shipped with Vista. My question is, will installing .Net 2.0 on XP also install support for .Net 1.1 applications as well? Also, is vista 1.1 compatible out of the box.
+2
A:
"Not really" to the first question. .NET 1.1 is an independent framework compared to 2.0. They can happily sit side by side on the same machine. Vista does not include 1.1. If you are trying to use 2.0 to run 1.1 applications, there may be problems. Yes to the second question: It can be installed.
Bob King
2009-02-24 17:59:14
I'm not clear on this -- certainly you can install both separately, but a .NET 1.1 app will be run using the .NET 2.0 framework if 1.1 is not installed. This may result in problems due to security changes in the framework but should mostly work just fine. Am I missing something?
Andrew Flanagan
2009-02-24 18:02:24
If you *can* install 1.1, then I think that should be way to run. 1.1 and 2.0 can be installed on the same machine, and an app built for 1.1 will use 1.1, while an app built for 2.0 will use 2.0. 1.1 appears to be able to be installed on Vista, but doesn't come pre-installed like 2.0 does.
Bob King
2009-02-24 18:04:42
That is correct. In general, 2.0 is backwards compatible with 1.1, but as Bob indicated there are places where this isn't true. In general, things should "just work", however.
Andy
2009-02-24 18:05:12
I revised my answer to make it a bit clearer. I was going for glib instead of precise. Hopefully I didn't cause too much confusion.
Bob King
2009-02-24 18:06:32
+1
A:
Vista includes the .NET Framework versions 2.0 and 3.0. As others have said, 2.0 can run 1.1 applications, but 2.0 changed some stuff that may break your 1.1 apps.
ryeguy
2009-02-24 18:00:30