Comments

Grazie wrote on 11/8/2005, 10:11 PM
You have it? You having issues? You thinking about updating? You mid-project? - G :)
NickHope wrote on 11/9/2005, 6:31 AM
Installed it this morning. Did a bit of work with Vegas this afternoon. Seemed mostly OK but I got an exception error which may well not be related to .NET framework. I was running a lot of stuff at the time.

Nick
JJKizak wrote on 11/9/2005, 8:44 AM
I believe there are some apps that have a problem with 2.0. I flushed it out and used the auto update aty windows and it updated to SP-1, not 2.0.

JJK
billwil wrote on 11/9/2005, 10:11 AM
The .NET Framework versions can run side-by-side...that's one of the design goals of the .NET framework. Upgrading should have no effect on the existing .NET applications (i.e. scripts in Vegas) that you have isntalled on your machine because they can just continue using the 1.1 framework, as long as you don't un-install it. Happy coding....
barleycorn wrote on 11/9/2005, 12:31 PM
I haven't been testing methodically but have had no problems so far.
dmakogon wrote on 11/9/2005, 1:57 PM
You should be fine. Here's a snippet from the Microsoft Developer Network (MSDN) regarding framework affinity.

The version of the .NET Framework that an application runs on is determined as follows:

* If the version of the .NET Framework that the application was built against is present on the computer, the application runs on that version.
* If the version of the .NET Framework that the application was built against is not present and a configuration file does not specify a version in a <supportedRuntime> Element, the application runs on the latest version of the .NET Framework that is present on the computer.
* If the version of the .NET Framework that the application was built against is not present and the configuration file specifies a version in a <supportedRuntime> Element, the application runs on the latest version that is specified in the application configuration file and is present on the computer.

So... as long as the .net 1.1 framework is still on your PC, you should see no difference.

For this full article, which also shows how to force an app to use a particular framework by modifying the app's config file, see http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/9w519wzk.aspx

David
dreamlx wrote on 11/9/2005, 9:52 PM
Grazie:

In the meantime, I did install it, and I didn't encounter any problems. Well I can never wait until am I not in mid-project as I am always in mid-project. For the last 6 month, there wasn't a week without a project. However I am using ghost, so in case if something I install breaks vegas, I have a fast and secure way back.
TheHappyFriar wrote on 11/10/2005, 5:20 AM
i ran 1.1 & 2 for months with no problem. But, 2 duesn't replace 1.1, which seems stupid IMHO (why call it 2 if it doesn't contain everything/update what 1.1 does? Does this mean we could need 3-4 versions of .net on our PC's within the next 2 years?)
dmakogon wrote on 11/10/2005, 6:39 AM
Actually, this strategy (having multiple frameworks) works to your advantage. Consider Vegas 6, built on the 1.1 framework. Sure, the 2.0 framework exposes all the same interfaces, but the implementation of those interfaces is not necessarily the same (for instance, memory management is totally reworked in the 2.0 framework).

Sony could not have tested Vegas 6 with the production 2.0 framework, as it only came out a week ago (although early preview releases have been out since 2004). If the 2.0 framework simply replaced your 1.1 framework, it would be unknown whether your existing apps, such as Vegas, would continue to run as expected.

For the small (~20-25MB) footprint of each framework implementation, that doesn't sound like a very heavy burden.

By the way, back in the ol' Visual Basic days, you needed a separate runtime for version 4, 5, and 6. And even C++ apps using MFC (a user interface library) required the appropriate MFC dll, so this is really nothing new.

David