How the full install packages for the .NET Framework 3.0 and the .NET Framework 3.5 differ

Geek Lectures - Things geeks should know about » Blog Archive » How the full install packages for the .NET Framework 3.0 and the .NET Framework 3.5 differ

Fri, 11 Jan 2008 08:44:22 GMT

PingBack from http://geeklectures.info/2008/01/10/how-the-full-install-packages-for-the-net-framework-30-and-the-net-framework-35-differ/

MSDN Blog Postings » How the full install packages for the .NET Framework 3.0 and the .NET Framework 3.5 differ

Fri, 11 Jan 2008 09:17:08 GMT

PingBack from http://msdnrss.thecoderblogs.com/2008/01/11/how-the-full-install-packages-for-the-net-framework-30-and-the-net-framework-35-differ/

MSDN Blog Postings » How the full install packages for the .NET Framework 3.0 and the .NET Framework 3.5 differ

Fri, 11 Jan 2008 09:18:19 GMT

PingBack from http://msdnrss.thecoderblogs.com/2008/01/11/how-the-full-install-packages-for-the-net-framework-30-and-the-net-framework-35-differ-2/

re: How the full install packages for the .NET Framework 3.0 and the .NET Framework 3.5 differ

willdean — Fri, 11 Jan 2008 11:53:33 GMT

It's clearly correct at some level to assert that comparing 200M to 50M is unfair or inaccurate. However, that you should have put people in the position of needing to make such a comparison is an illustration of a real blind spot MS has about the way people feel about the size of the .NET redistribution.

.NET is supposed to be the technology that MS has bet the farm on, but you've always seemed woefully careless about the challenges people have in trying to get the framework deployed on to their customers' machines. Bundling 60MB of *IA64* files for goodness sake!!!! I doubt I'll ever meet anyone who ever *owned* an IA64 machine, let alone installed the 3.5 framework on it. Why not chuck in the Alpa, PPC and MIPs images that work with NT3.51 while you're at it?

I just wish you guys could see what some of this stuff looks like from the outside.

re: How the full install packages for the .NET Framework 3.0 and the .NET Framework 3.5 differ

astebner — Fri, 11 Jan 2008 19:12:10 GMT

Hi Willdean - The full install package for the .NET Framework 3.5 is just that - a full install package that contains all possible payload. Most customers won't need to redistribute ia64 bits, but some will, so they have to be included in a full install package.

The main thing that I think is missing from the .NET Framework 3.5 release is separate "full" install packages for each processor architecture like the ones for 3.0. Those can be assembled by removing the ia64 bits from the all-architecture full install package, but that does require additional steps that are new in 3.5. Unfortunately, the deployment documentation that walks through how to do that hasn't been published yet.

One thing to note too - back in 3.0, the full install package for x64 contained some duplication of bits from the x86 package. That meant that developers who needed to redistribute both x86 and x64 would have to redistribute some duplicate payload to make that possible. This duplication is eliminated in 3.5, so x64 will essentially use the same payload as x86 plus the additional x64-specific payload it needs.

Interesting Finds: January 12, 2008

Jason Haley — Sat, 12 Jan 2008 20:59:12 GMT

.NET 3.5 Runtime Distribution Size « Rams On It - .NET

.NET 3.5 Runtime Distribution Size « Rams On It - .NET — Thu, 27 Mar 2008 22:54:49 GMT

PingBack from http://ramsonit.wordpress.com/2008/03/27/net-35-runtime-distribution-size/

Post XP SP3 Update Pack

Post XP SP3 Update Pack — Sun, 29 Jun 2008 15:08:33 GMT

PingBack from http://www.edugeek.net/forums/windows/21465-post-xp-sp3-update-pack.html#post210436

Links to information about .NET Framework package sizes and web-based detection logic

Aaron Stebner's WebLog — Wed, 24 Dec 2008 00:21:05 GMT

Back when the .NET Framework 3.5 shipped, I posted a brief explanation about the size and contents of

re: How the full install packages for the .NET Framework 3.0 and the .NET Framework 3.5 differ

peterchen — Mon, 09 Feb 2009 17:07:44 GMT

>> The main thing that I think is missing from the .NET Framework 3.5 release is separate "full" install packages for each processor architecture like the ones for 3.0

Definitely! We have a comparedly small user base, but still "disconnected setup" are quite common. If the user the user receives CD, he simply expects "everything to be on it", whether he has internet or not.

Distribution size is always a factor (download bandwidth, media size, installation duration, and - on the developer side - mastering, archieving uploading install media).

All interna aside, it is perceived as a runtime of 200MB which is *still* an adoption stopper. How sould i respond to my boss when he says "200MB? Can't we just use the old one?"

Why does such a thing happen? With all the work going into .NET and its strategic position, how can such a simple factor be ignored?

I don't blame, I just wonder.

re: How the full install packages for the .NET Framework 3.0 and the .NET Framework 3.5 differ

astebner — Mon, 09 Feb 2009 20:16:58 GMT

Hi Peterchen - There is a more detailed explanation of the packaging for the .NET Framework 3.5 on Scott Hanselman's blog, so I'd suggest using that to help respond to your boss' questions. I posted a few links that would be useful for this type of question at http://blogs.msdn.com/astebner/archive/2008/12/23/9250918.aspx.

This type of issue is definitely not being ignored - there has been a ton of feedback and work is being done in the .NET Framework 4.0 timeframe based on that feedback. Also, the .NET Framework 3.5 client profile that was released around the time of VS 2008 SP1 and the .NET Framework 3.5 SP1 was a result of some of that feedback as well.