I wanted to respond to a few comments..


Keeron asked about what .NET Framework includes exactly.  JasonZ does a good job with this one..

The Linq support for C# (and VB for that mater) is scheduled for Orcas... We have not locked on a final version number, my hunch will be “.NET Framework 3.5”

We do actually have a merged Windows SDK that includes all of the content as of .NET Framework 3.0\Vista...


George asks about SP1 of the .NET Framework 2.0... Again the details have not been 100% worked out, so don’t take this as an official statement, but I expect SP1 of the .NET Framework 2.0 to be at the same time as Orcas .NET Framework ships. For servicing releases we generally do not change the assembly version number at all (this makes it an in place update) and only update the win32 version number by the number of builds it took us to get there.  So short answer is no, the core components will not have their version numbers reset.  

I certainly agree with you George on driving simplicity here... That is why I’d push  folks to simply talk about if an application requires .NET Framework 1.1, 2.0, 3.0 or 3.5 and not delve deeply into how those are actually put together.  


Jvierra – we are absolutely looking spending some time on getting great factoring and layering with in the .NET Framework.  Today, we don’t have a system that is as pluggable as we’d like (and you describe), but that is the direction we would eventually like to get to.. However it will likely not happen for the orcas timeframe.


Philip – I sure hope we don’t end up in a world like you describe.  My strong advice is for customers to simply state the minium .NET Framework version number they support.  There is never a need to talk about “.NET Framework 2.0 with .NET Framework 3.0 frameworks”... It will be more clear to customers, admins, developers, etc to simply say “this application requires .NET Framework 3.0”


Dennis – We needed the name change from WinFX to .NET Framework to drive some simplicity with developer customers.  I personally spent time with customers where I had to explain the difference between .NET Framework and WinFX.. This confusion was caused by our naming and I am confident it is addressed now.


Chris Nahr – Thanks, I fixed the type-o ;-)  

You are right – the packaging issue has nothing to do with the name.  This packaging plan was exactly the plan before we did the name change.  The name change is intended to make it clear how these new technologies relate to the .NET Framework – that is that the constitute a new version of it.  

We are working on our factoring and layering to enable the system to be more pluggable such that different parts can change without breaking other parts.  In Orcas, we are making some baby steps in that direction. For example we are adding Linq support to C# and VB without a breaking change and without a requiring a full stack update.  


Jonathan Kaufman – I am trying with this post.. Keep the questions coming.. they really do help us hone what we are doing here.  I LOVE forwarding my reader’s comments around inside Microsoft as a catalyst for change!  


Muhammad Mosa – asked about VSTS and VS generally.  While there is clearly a TON of synergy between .NET Framework and VS, one release does not have to require another.  Look at .NET Framework 3.0, it does not require a new VS release.  And on the other side, look at VSTS new Data SKU we just announced, it does not require a new framework.  



Hope this helps – keep the comments coming!