Talk:.NET Framework version history

This article was nominated for deletion on 12 September 2018. The result of the discussion was keep.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the .NET Framework version history article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Computing: Software Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Software (assessed as Mid-importance). Microsoft: .NET / Windows Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Microsoft, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles relating to Microsoft on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MicrosoftWikipedia:WikiProject MicrosoftTemplate:WikiProject MicrosoftMicrosoft Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject .NET (assessed as High-importance). This article is supported by WikiProject Microsoft Windows (assessed as High-importance).

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

• http://ben.skyiv.com/clrversion.html
  • In .NET Framework on 2011-05-20 21:40:36, Socket Error: 'getaddrinfo failed'
  • In .NET Framework on 2011-05-31 13:11:49, Socket Error: 'getaddrinfo failed'

--JeffGBot (talk) 13:12, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

• http://dotnetaddict.dotnetdevelopersjournal.com/orcas_hidden_gem__the_managed_pnrp_stack.htm
  • In .NET Framework version history on 2011-05-20 21:40:50, 404 Not Found
  • In .NET Framework version history on 2011-05-31 13:12:14, 404 Not Found

--JeffGBot (talk) 13:12, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

• http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=ee2118cc-51cd-46ad-ab17-af6fff7538c9&displaylang=en
  • In .NET Framework version history on 2011-05-20 21:41:00, 404 Page not available
  • In .NET Framework version history on 2011-05-31 13:12:20, 404 Page not available

--JeffGBot (talk) 13:12, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

• http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=a9ef9a95-58d2-4e51-a4b7-bea3cc6962cb&displaylang=en
  • In .NET Framework version history on 2011-05-20 21:40:51, 404 Page not available
  • In .NET Framework version history on 2011-05-31 13:12:30, 404 Page not available

--JeffGBot (talk) 13:12, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

• http://winfx.msdn.microsoft.com/library/en-us/dv_fxunmanref/html/703b8381-43db-4a4d-9faa-cca39302d922.asp
  • In .NET Framework version history on 2011-05-20 21:41:00, Socket Error: 'A connection attempt failed because the connected party did not properly respond after a period of time, or established connection failed because connected host has failed to respond'
  • In .NET Framework version history on 2011-05-31 13:12:40, Socket Error: 'A connection attempt failed because the connected party did not properly respond after a period of time, or established connection failed because connected host has failed to respond'

--JeffGBot (talk) 13:13, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

• http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/netframework/Aa497323.aspx}
  • In .NET Framework version history on 2011-05-31 13:12:14, 404 Not Found
  • In .NET Framework version history on 2011-05-31 14:44:59, 404 Not Found
  • In .NET Framework version history on 2011-06-20 03:14:20, 404 Not Found

--JeffGBot (talk) 03:14, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Implicit line continuations were added for Visual Basic in Visual Studio 2010, but the developer can still target the earlier frameworks. Although Visual Studio 2010 is listed as the dev tool for .NET 4.0, implicit line continuation is a feature of the IDE (Visual Studio 2010 itself, not the framework targeted by the application). So to say .NET Framework 4.0 adds support for line continuations is not accurate. Visual Studio 2010 adds that feature, but the source can be compiled against any of the frameworks and still work fine. 71.236.207.101 (talk) 00:09, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please revise the tables and references to use the more logical ISO 8601 dates (e.g., 2013-03-06), which the MoS specifically allows, especially since this article is oriented toward a technical audience. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.69.160.1 (talk) 15:21, 6 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: Hello. The table is already using ISO 8601 dates. The citation style, however, may not change. According to the Manual of Style (WP:DATESRET) date style should not change once it is established unless there is a reason based on strong national ties. Currently, the citations chiefly use dmy as their date style. It should not change.

The technical nature of this article does not change that rule. In fact, as I have experienced, the date style is just a matter of personal preference and nothing more.

Best regards,

Codename Lisa (talk) 19:49, 6 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

From List of features removed in Windows_8: ".NET Framework 3.5 is no longer included by default. Installing it requires an Internet connection, although Microsoft has published a workaround that enables users to install it from Windows installation disc." (and 1.1 no longer supported). This implies it matters. That is, 4+ is not (fully) compatible(?). I vaguely remember seeing before that programs need a specific version. Is that usually not the case. If it is then it should be in the article and maybe also here that versions are no longer supported or shipped with? Maybe such info should be in List_of_.NET_Framework_versions or the main .NET article. comp.arch (talk) 12:42, 22 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It would be helpful to add the Product Version to the table, similar to the last column ("Version") of the table shown here: What .NET Framework version numbers go with what service pack — Preceding unsigned comment added by Opus4210 (talk • contribs) 19:41, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

--Opus4210 (talk) 19:44, 10 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This is what I came looking for in the first place. And it was not in the article so I added it. No it is not in the main article. And I think that it is pretty obvious that an article on previous versions would consider compatibility. And the change with 4.0 was a surprise. So feel free to improve or, if necessary, correct. But do not just delete. (I rarely edit on Wikipedia these days, not worth the bother of dealing with the reverters.) Tuntable (talk) 02:12, 20 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This article is called ".NET Framework version history" and anything not related to it must stay out of it.

And FYI, you did not adhere to existing writing style. This is enough to warrant a revert. And you seem to think edit warring is the best way to resolve your dispute. No surprise you find editing Wikipedia unpleasant. Fleet Command (talk) 15:49, 20 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The page has no listing of which operating system versions are supported for each version of the .Net Framework. I added this to information to the table, but it was reverted, as the table now contains too much information. I agree; but how should this information be added? Perhaps a paragraph should be added at the bottom of each section listing. But I feel that this information would be better served in table format. In that case, what should the section be titled? 'Supported Operating Systems'? Where should it be located? What columns should it contain? Or perhaps we should replace the 'included in' columns of the existing table. 'Included in' is interesting, but not relevant, where as 'supported by' is relevant. As a programmer, this would be some of the most valuable information on this page; but it is missing.

Shane32Wiki (talk) 02:25, 3 December 2016 (UTC)Shane32Wiki[reply]

Hello, Shane32Wiki

I am glad we agree on the information overload point of Template:.NET Framework version history. I have a 1080p monitor and the table was still choking on it.

As to where to present this information, .NET Framework version history (the article associated with this talk page) is the best place. There is individual sections for each version of .NET Framework that can accommodate this information, along with a source for each.

Best regards,

Codename Lisa (talk) 06:52, 3 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What ".NET Standard"? Shouldn't it be introduced somehow?

It suddenly appears in the middle of the article.

--Mortense (talk) 00:38, 10 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

According to https://blogs.windows.com/windows-insider/2021/11/17/announcing-windows-11-insider-preview-build-22504/ the new .NET Framework 4.8.1 adds native ARM64 runtime support. BFeely (talk) 16:29, 21 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:IOS version history which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 17:47, 23 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Why doesn't any of the articles - .NET, Microsoft .NET strategy, .NET Framework version history, .NET Foundation - talk about what the name means and the reason it was adopted?? 2600:1012:A021:63F1:C96C:53CB:7FC6:BD41 (talk) 03:10, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]