tags:

views:

361

answers:

4

My boss keeps asking me "which version of .NET are we upgrading to", to which I answer "3.5, the latest one".

But then he sees things about how .NET 3.5 is just a set of libraries on top of .NET 2.0 and I find myself having to explain it to him.

And of course the version of C# that ships with .NET 3.5 is actually C# 3.0.

What's a good way to explain the different versions of .NET to a non-techie type in a way that doesn't confuse them or freak them out?

+20  A: 

You should decompose .NET as a package of three different things:

  1. CLR, the runtime
  2. Libraries
  3. Languages, compilers and tools

This way, it'll be pretty easier to explain.

For instance, in .NET 3.5 we have:

  1. .NET CLR v2.0
  2. v3.5 assemblies
  3. C# 3.0 compiler
Mehrdad Afshari
+7  A: 

And just to add to Mehrdad's list:

4) Admit the nomenclature is positively retarded, and is a good reason that Microsoft's DEVDIV should take the marketing department outside and shoot them.

-Oisin

x0n
A harsh, yet just, punishment.
womp
.NET is a stupid title for the framework.
Ronnie Overby
It's not the worst thing on the planet... The worst was Windows .NET Server Family 2003 which was fortunately renamed to Windows Server 2003!
Mehrdad Afshari
What about SharePoint 2001 WSS (Windows Storage System - the backing store element), then SharePoint 2003 WSS (Windows SharePoint Services, the whole product) ?
x0n
Longhorn still kicks the s**t outta "vista." Feh.
Will
A: 

If I were to load the .NET homepage and see all of the references to 3.5, I'd assume that was the most current version.

Maybe this diagram would help too

Greg
And your assumption would be correct. .NET 3.5 is the latest version, currently.
Cheeso
+1  A: 

Jon Skeet gives a good overview in his book C# in Depth - Chapter 1

roman m