[RESOLVED] backwards compatibility of vs 2005 with .net framework 1.1

[adshocker]

hi,

can i develop a program in vs 2005 and use .net framework 1.1?

client uses .net 1.1 so i have to.

thanks.

[JuggaloBrotha]

Not so much, you need VS 2003 for that.

I think (but don't know for sure right off hand) you might be able to use VS 2010 & target 1.1

[Shaggy Hiker]

No version other than 2003 targets 1.1. All versions after 2003 (which means 2005, 2008, and 2010) have the ability to target back to framework 2.0, but none go earlier.

I ought to add that framework 2.0 was pushed to all XP computers as an Automatic Update, and 3.5 was pushed out as an optional update and has come installed on newer OS versions. Therefore, it is fairly likely that the client has 2.0, even if they don't know it. You might confirm (and may already have done so) that they don't have it before trying to go back to 2003 for development. I liked that version, but I also felt that the changes from 2003 to 2005 were the biggest changes between two versions of .NET, so I would prefer to stick with framework 2.0, if at all possible.

[adshocker]

thanks.

i'll have a chat with the admin to check if they have the other versions installed or if they can install it.

[Nightwalker83]

No version other than 2003 targets 1.1. All versions after 2003 (which means 2005, 2008, and 2010) have the ability to target back to framework 2.0, but none go earlier.

I thought framework 2.0 etc would include the previous frameworks also? That means that if I target 2.0 that covers 1.1 as well.

[Shaggy Hiker]

I'm not sure about that. I believe that 3 and 3.5 are based on 2, but I think 2 is radically different from 1.1. In any case, if you target 2.0, you would almost certainly use some of the features that were added to 2.0, which would mean that even if 1.1 was installed it still wouldn't provide the functionality needed.

[techgnome]

1.1 was based on 1.0.
2.0 was a new version
3.0 extended 2.0
and 3.5 extended that again.
4.0 once again is a new set

-tg

[adshocker]

client agreed to install 2.0 and 3.5. =)

thanks.

[Nightwalker83]

I'm not sure about that. I believe that 3 and 3.5 are based on 2, but I think 2 is radically different from 1.1. In any case, if you target 2.0, you would almost certainly use some of the features that were added to 2.0, which would mean that even if 1.1 was installed it still wouldn't provide the functionality needed.

Unless all the features from 1.0 are sill included and they just removed the extra features that were in 1.1. So 1.0 being the base would still be in there it would be ok. I am thinking they totally disregarded version 1.0 altogether. However, this isn't the case.

[Shaggy Hiker]

client agreed to install 2.0 and 3.5. =)

thanks.

Sweet. With 3.5 you can use LINQ and other more beneficial stuff.

[JuggaloBrotha]

Unless all the features from 1.0 are sill included and they just removed the extra features that were in 1.1. So 1.0 being the base would still be in there it would be ok. I am thinking they totally disregarded version 1.0 altogether. However, this isn't the case.

I dont think any features in the 1.0 or 1.1 Frameworks were removed when they made 2.0, I know that things in the 1.0 and 1.1 Frameworks were moved around (the System.Xml namespace was created and the existing xml functionality was moved to it, plus the addition of new xml stuff) which was the biggest incompatibility between the 1.0/1.1 and the 2.0 Frameworks.

Personally, I target 2.0 or above for all the projects I can. 2.0 works on all the same OS's as 1.0/1.1 and it's by far much easier to migrate a project to a newer Framework if you start with a 2.0 FW project. Though with 4.0 being it's own FW (not stacked on the 3.5 FW) within a few years here I just may try and start all new projects target that and migrate the projects I can to it, but the 4.0 FW is WinXP and newer so my Win2k client's project's can't be a 4.0 one till they update all of their systems (I hope they start to soon, it really would be nice of them to).