2 types of .NET Framework?

Not sure what the x86 or x64 means.  Any ideas? 

Hi

x86 means 32 bit OS and x64 is 64 bit OS so it supports both 32 and 64 bit OS .

You need to check and see if it is for Vista or XP thou !

See Yea

Hi,

Thanks for the reply.  Do you know the difference between the meaning of: redistributable and no redsistributable?  Thanks.

Hi,
Thanks for the reply.  I do have two links if you would like to take a look at it.  One of them is the latest version 3.5, but it does not say it's redistributable.  The otehr is for version 1.1, and it IS redistributable.

http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?familyid=333325FD-AE52-4E35-B531-508D977D32A6&displaylang=en

 

http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=262d25e3-f589-4842-8157-034d1e7cf3a3&displaylang=en

 

 

I contacted Microsoft regarding this.  They told me that I would have to phone or email technical support and the cost is either $99 for email I believe, and $265? or something like that for phone.  Either way, it was way too expensive for asking the difference between redistributable and non redistributable items.

 

Thanks.

Hi

No not without reading Microsoft's Downloads page .

But my guess is redistributable means it can be used by a company Like Dell or ATI ! 

And no redsistributable it would be used by Microsoft when you update windows!!

Just guess work on my end !!

Good Luck

You can install 3.5 if you wish.

 

Redistributable means that software vendors can include the MS app in their installation package (another example is directX runtime redistributable). Quite a few apps that require a particular version of .NET framework include it so that their software can be installed and run, whether or not the PC has the .NET framework installed (the installer checks whether it needs to be installed or not).

 

I don't know whether there are many apps requiring 3.5 as it has only just come out, so maybe that is why it is not labelled redistributable.

 

There are different versions of .NET framework: 1.1, 2 and 3. 2 is not strictly speaking an update of 1.1 as it is not completely backward compatible (new fearures were added, others withdrawn). So not all apps designed to run with 1.1 would do so with 2. But 1.1 and 2 can be installed side byside on the same PC. I think the same is true for 3.0. 3.5  is an updated version of 3 (complete, does not require 3.0 to be installed).

JRosenfeld
Thank you for taking the time to reply. I appreciate it.  I am in the process of reinstalling everything (doing clean reinstall of Windows XP Home SP2), and it turns out that in order to use Dell Media Experience, I need to have .NET Framework 1.1  The version of Media Experience that Dell sent me is 3.1.  Do you happen to know if that would work with .Net Framework 1.1?  The thing is, my computer originally came shipped with Media Experience 3.0, not 3.1.  But Dell sent me the 3.1 version CD instead, and I want to make sure that .NET Framework 1.1 (or version 3.5 for that matter) can work with Media Experience 3.1. 

 

Thank you for any advice on this.

I don't have Dell Media Experience, so cannot answer your question for certain, but I strongly suspect that if v3.0 required .NET framework 1.1, then v3.1 will require the same. In any case it does no harm to install .NET framework 1.1, then 1.1 SP1 (and any subsequent updates to it which Windows updates should offer you) and seeing whether that is sufficient. If not, as I said you can install .NET framework 2.0 and/or 3.0/3.5 (which, as I now understand it includes 2.0 SP1) side by side with 1.1, they don't interfere with each other and are then available for any application that requires one version or the other. I have 1.1 and 2.0 installed on my system, not bothered with 3/3.5 as yet as none of the apps I use require it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

If you install version 3.5, it will also install versions 2.0 SP1 and 3.0 SP1

 

And for those who are interested in what Microsoft has to say about .NET Framework version compatibility: http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/47a587hk(VS.80).aspx

 

Thank you both for your posts.  I appreciate it.