Is .NET Framework 4.5/4.5.1 automatically installed by WU on Vista/7?


Recommended Posts

It's offered as critical update, but not automatically installed.

 

Since it's a superset of .NET 4.0 ff I would recommend installing it. Saves you from having to wait for a metric ton of .NET 4 updates to install.

It's offered as critical update, but not automatically installed.

 

Since it's a superset of .NET 4.0 ff I would recommend installing it. Saves you from having to wait for a metric ton of .NET 4 updates to install.

 

If critical updates aren't automatically installed (unless deselected) then which ones are? Catastrophic ones? :O

Don't modern versions of Windows throw a warning telling you to install the newer versions of .net anyway when you try to run the assemblies?

Yes they show a warning but installing a framework with all the updates can take up to an hour so when switching to a newer version I first have to consider if it would become a major inconvenience for most of the users or not.

 

I'm pretty sure Windows automatically installed some of newer frameworks (3.5/3.5.1 for sure if 2.0 or 3.0 is installed; I think I also saw 4.0 but I don't know if there were related conditions) but I never bothered checking the updates when setting up computers/VMs.

 

I would be much happier if I could use 4.5.1, or even 4.5 for having the better WPF controls available now that XP support is being discontinued (4.5 is not available on XP so it was a major issue until now). WPF on 3.5 and somewhat also on 4.0 can be some kind of a nightmare from hell.

Yes they show a warning but installing a framework with all the updates can take up to an hour so when switching to a newer version I first have to consider if it would become a major inconvenience for most of the users or not.

 

I'm pretty sure Windows automatically installed some of newer frameworks (3.5/3.5.1 for sure if 2.0 or 3.0 is installed; I think I also saw 4.0 but I don't know if there were related conditions) but I never bothered checking the updates when setting up computers/VMs.

 

I would be much happier if I could use 4.5.1, or even 4.5 for having the better WPF controls available now that XP support is being discontinued (4.5 is not available on XP so it was a major issue until now). WPF on 3.5 and somewhat also on 4.0 can be some kind of a nightmare from hell.

 

An hour is not a typical install time. With XP support discontinued, you shouldn't be targeting 4.0 (a known buggy version of .net) unless it is a client requirement.

An hour is not a typical install time. With XP support discontinued, you shouldn't be targeting 4.0 (a known buggy version of .net) unless it is a client requirement.

That only if you consider installing only the framework, but there are also all the related service packs, updates, etc. that are extremely slow to install (plus the download times). Ngen trashing the hard drive for a while after the install and after most of the updates can also be quite the annoyance. For now I never had any particular problem with 4.0 and would still prefer it to 3.5 anyday but that's because I wouldn't use WPF on any of both.

That only if you consider installing only the framework, but there are also all the related service packs, updates, etc. that are extremely slow to install (plus the download times). Ngen trashing the hard drive for a while after the install and after most of the updates can also be quite the annoyance. For now I never had any particular problem with 4.0 and would still prefer it to 3.5 anyday but that's because I wouldn't use WPF on any of both.

 

I've never had an issue with installing it or updates. I think you are mostly referring to the time it took 4.0 to pre-cache everything (read as: compile all of its assemblies into native code for your PC).

 

Targeting 4.0 is in generally a bad idea unless you know what you are doing. Remember, 4.5 is an in place upgrade of 4.0 which means that if you test a 4.0 target on a 4.5 install, you will be using the 4.5 library assemblies which have fixes for numerous defects over the 4.0 library assemblies. This means you will never exhibit broken behavior caused by 4.0 bugs. This is the fundamental reason why you shouldn't be targeting 4.0: because it leads to bugs and breakage that you cannot test for unless you are actually developing using the 4.0 platform directly.

As already been answered, .NET 4.0 and 4.5 are not automatically available on Windows Vista and 7. Available as updates, but as a developer, you shouldn't count on that.

 

However, Windows Vista and 7 do have versions of .NET installed. They both have .NET 2.0 (Vista has 2.0 SP1, and 7 2.0 SP2), and is irremovable, meaning you can always target it and expect it to work. Of course, WPF wasn't added until 3.0 or 3.5, so... :/ Vista and 7 also have .NET 3.0 and 3.5 installed, respectively, but can be removed, so, again, you shouldn't count on that.

 

Windows 8 has .NET 4.5 included, irremovably, and Windows 8.1 has 4.5.1. So at least developing for Windows 8 and later, you won't have to worry about the end user installing anything to get it to work. (Unless you are targeting a pre-4.0 version of .NET)

I've never had an issue with installing it or updates. I think you are mostly referring to the time it took 4.0 to pre-cache everything (read as: compile all of its assemblies into native code for your PC).

 

I'm referring to all of the time wasted. Download time, install time, updating time, most users don't have an high-end pc and it would take a lot of time. That also providing the users won't get tricked by those annoying adware-infested spammy search engine results in the process.

 

Targeting 4.0 is in generally a bad idea unless you know what you are doing. Remember, 4.5 is an in place upgrade of 4.0 which means that if you test a 4.0 target on a 4.5 install, you will be using the 4.5 library assemblies which have fixes for numerous defects over the 4.0 library assemblies. This means you will never exhibit broken behavior caused by 4.0 bugs. This is the fundamental reason why you shouldn't be targeting 4.0: because it leads to bugs and breakage that you cannot test for unless you are actually developing using the 4.0 platform directly.

 

Between 3.5 and 4.0 I'd rather pick 4.0 anyday, I've used it since it was released and I don't remember any particular issue (maybe a bit worse memory management) however I never used WPF with it because of the horrible performance, I only started using WPF after 4.5 came out.

 

As already been answered, .NET 4.0 and 4.5 are not automatically available on Windows Vista and 7. Available as updates, but as a developer, you shouldn't count on that.

 

My question was whether those updates are actually installed or not, because I have confused memories about that. I'm pretty sure I saw 4.0 automatically being checked on some machines but I'm also sure I saw Windows XP installing framework 3.5 for no reason at all (completely clean install with no other frameworks installed).

 

However, Windows Vista and 7 do have versions of .NET installed. They both have .NET 2.0 (Vista has 2.0 SP1, and 7 2.0 SP2), and is irremovable, meaning you can always target it and expect it to work. Of course, WPF wasn't added until 3.0 or 3.5, so... :/ Vista and 7 also have .NET 3.0 and 3.5 installed, respectively, but can be removed, so, again, you shouldn't count on that.

 

Windows 8 has .NET 4.5 included, irremovably, and Windows 8.1 has 4.5.1. So at least developing for Windows 8 and later, you won't have to worry about the end user installing anything to get it to work. (Unless you are targeting a pre-4.0 version of .NET)

 

I do know Vista and 7 come with framework 2.0/3.5 and was previously targeting 3.5 for that reason, because every 2.0 install (on XP and Vista) was automatically turned into 3.5 by Windows Update so it became a common platform for all the OS versions. If Windows Update did the same with 4.5 or 4.5.1 now that I can stop caring about XP support I'd happily switch to 4.5/4.5.1. But can somebody confirm that?

My question was whether those updates are actually installed or not, because I have confused memories about that. I'm pretty sure I saw 4.0 automatically being checked on some machines but I'm also sure I saw Windows XP installing framework 3.5 for no reason at all (completely clean install with no other frameworks installed).

 

 

I do know Vista and 7 come with framework 2.0/3.5 and was previously targeting 3.5 for that reason, because every 2.0 install (on XP and Vista) was automatically turned into 3.5 by Windows Update so it became a common platform for all the OS versions. If Windows Update did the same with 4.5 or 4.5.1 now that I can stop caring about XP support I'd happily switch to 4.5/4.5.1. But can somebody confirm that?

It's already been answered in this thread: 4.5 is not installed automatically on 7. Unless the behavior has changed with the 4.5.1 release, that is still the case. You could easily roll a temporary VM with 7 to test though. That's what I would I do if it were me

It's already been answered in this thread: 4.5 is not installed automatically on 7. Unless the behavior has changed with the 4.5.1 release, that is still the case. You could easily roll a temporary VM with 7 to test.

^ that - it is offered as important (not critical as I mistakenly wrote above) update, but not installed automatically on Windows 7.

It's already been answered in this thread: 4.5 is not installed automatically on 7. Unless the behavior has changed with the 4.5.1 release, that is still the case. You could easily roll a temporary VM with 7 to test though. That's what I would I do if it were me

I did some test installs on a VM and can confirm that:

- WU (now) doesn't install any newer framework on a clean XP SP3 install, with or without the included 1.1 installed.

- WU doesn't install any newer framework on a clean Windows 7 install (3.5 preinstalled). Windows Update only shows 4.5.1 (4.5 is not shown) as a recommended update (not important nor critical) in the optionals tab with no changes if I install 4.0 (client or full(extended)) or 4.5.

I did some test installs on a VM and can confirm that:

- WU (now) doesn't install any newer framework on a clean XP SP3 install, with or without the included 1.1 installed.

- WU doesn't install any newer framework on a clean Windows 7 install (3.5 preinstalled). Windows Update only shows 4.5.1 (4.5 is not shown) as a recommended update (not important nor critical) in the optionals tab with no changes if I install 4.0 (client or full(extended)) or 4.5.

 

What about if you install SP1? Does it give you 4.0 then automatically with that?

What about if you install SP1? Does it give you 4.0 then automatically with that?

Sorry I forgot to mention I used a Windows 7 SP1 disc to install. I also installed all the batches of security updates for each framework to be sure nothing changed.

 

As last thing I enabled Microsoft Update and now the update is listed as important (not in the optionals tab but also not selected) because when it's set up it enables the setting to have recommended updates considered as important.

Don't assume anything about the older .NET versions with the newer OSes.  For example, Server 2012 ships with 3.5, but you have to go to "Turn Windows features on or off" to install them.  Then you have to wait for the updates to install, then the updates to the updates, then...

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • You can easily go overboard here. From what you are saying, it is a home office, a future NAS, a few client devices and one maybe two wireless access points. Many of the above tips are great and completely spot on, but are aimed at larger setups. If you are interested in networking and want to play or want to pursue a networking interest for your career then exposure to the tips above is a good idea. If however the network is something you want to largely get right and forget about for 5-10 years then for your home you can dial it back.   Perhaps some questions to help focus in on requirements: How many wired network connections do you need now? Count up all the devices. Assume for a SOHO NAS you'll be using two network ports. This - with a sensible growth factor - defines the minimum switch size. Do you have any idea how many wireless access points you'll need to give the coverage of your house/flat that you want? Might you move within the life of this equipment and need to change "everything"? Or might you want coverage over multiple floors/out into a garden? Do you currently have any signal problems or dead zones? Is there any interest in adding CCTV now or in the future? Are you a heavy IoT/wi-fi smart home device user or do you avoid these things? Are you in a flat, or a bungalow, two-story, three-story house? Will you need to get many wired connections between floors or is everything concentrated with only a couple of wireless access points in the upstairs/basement spaces?   In terms of cost savings If you are not certain on wireless access point densities, but have a scaled floor plan to hand, try plugging it into the Ubiquiti designer -https://design.ui.com/ (Create project in the bottom right, then find the floor plan option in the menu and upload the image(s). Don't forget to set the scale before drawing in some walls and dragging a couple of  AP's in to see what you might expect to receive). You will want to get 2.5GbE ports, but not necessarily all 2.5GbE. Modern wireless access points increasingly use 2.5GbE even if your equipment is only on 1GbE. 5GbE might be worth considering, but will change the price point. You can pick up very inexpensive 2.5GbE / 5GbE USB adapters and PCIe adapters for your larger devices if you don't have anything over 1GbE (you can even use them with some SmartTV's which tend to only be 100Mbps too). The same for replacing old Wi-fi chips in laptops and micro PCs (they tend to be replaceable) and this will give you more incentive to push for better equipment out the gate. As has been said by others, if you are pulling cables through walls, floors or ducting. Spend now and don't regret it later. If you are making outdoor runs, invest in the correct shielded cabling now and ensure that it is earthed. Cat6 will run 10GbE provided that the run distance isn't excessive. If you need the full 100m run though, go for 6a. Keep in mind that 6a is stiffer, heavier, harder to terminate and more expensive, so you could compromise with 6a between floors and then Cat6 into rooms. Get a decent router. Get away from the junk your ISP will provide you with. It will give you options and will last a LONG time. You will be able to move ISP without second thought if you have a decent router as a base. If you are techy and want all the toys and options, something like a NetGate appliance / a pfSense Community self build (there are plenty of reasonably cheap small form factor chassis you can pickup for this on Amazon etc). If you just want something to work and be easy to configure and find help for though, Ubiquiti. Whether you need Power Over Ethernet (PoE) depends upon your appetite for PoE devices. If you need more than a couple of PoE devices, then a switch is worth considering - CCTV, access points, door security. If you have zero interest in any of that and will only wind up with one or two access points in the long run, and IF you are able to put them near 120/240v power, then a couple of PoE injectors and plugging them into the wall will save you money. If you change your mind later and start accumulating PoE devices though, you will regret not getting PoE now. Space: large switches with high port densities, PoE, redundancy, SFP ports (for fibre optics or 10/25GbE) quickly become big devices. If you don't have a comms room in mind and don't want them on display in your home, then keep in mind that you might not want to start exploring prosumer and SMB networking equipment for your home.    If you can offer us some of the answers to these questions and your thinking on needs, perhaps we can help you drill into the 'what' 🙂
    • IT admins feel overwhelmingly "sick of" Microsoft and Windows 11 "garbage" apps, products by Sayan Sen From time to time, Microsoft brings changes to Windows 11, like improvements to its core features, such as the Start menu. One such change began rolling out recently with new policies, alongside a major bug fix that finally came after a year. However, not every change or "improvement" Microsoft makes may land. For example, earlier today, we wrote an article on the user reaction to an earlier design choice Microsoft made on Windows 10, when it was making an updated system specs page. You can read about the response, which was mostly negative, in our report here. Aside from general home users, professionals too, or at least some of them, are not very satisfied with Microsoft's overall policies and product functionalities. There are multiple instances of people ranting and complaining online, highlighting various issues they are facing or have faced recently when working with Microsoft products like Windows 11 or other Microsoft 365-based apps. For example, one such user, nostradamefrus, shared their experience on Reddit wherein they had to deal with an apparently buggy patch that broke authentication on Microsoft 365 apps when using RDS (Remote Desktop Services). The user wrote: "I'm so sick of Microsoft ... Their latest security patch broke probably our most important business app and uninstalling the patch breaks auth with 365 apps in RDS environments. So the options are either "you can't use the app" or "you can't use any Office 365 product" until they clean up their mess. But shoving Copilot into every facet of existence is what's really important, right? Someone break this company up already" On a separate thread, another Reddit user made a sarcastic post about the difficulties of working with Microsoft Graph PowerShell due to some of the command complexities. A commenter Trelfar chimed in, saying that much of it had to do with how it's inherently designed and alleged that it was done in that way by Microsoft to save time and budget. The words were certainly pretty harsh as they wrote: "The key to understanding why some of the commands are garbage is that every command is a wrapper that calls the native Graph API which requires JSON params, and many of them were procedurally implemented based on the underlying API so they could hit release ahead of the deprecation deadline for the modules it was replacing (like the AzureAD module). ... In short, it wasn't a design choice to make it work like this, it was a time/budget compromise to not put the effort in for some of the commands." Finally, a user Godzillian123, who is clearly very displeased about having to work daily with the management and deployment of Windows apps in their enterprise environment. The Redditor writes: "I wake up every day with but one lamenting thought in my head. That I will be having to deal with WindowsApps and appx style application at my organisation, for another day .... Sincerely whoever designed this. You are an idiot. .... you take the cake for biggest smart idiot award. I'm sure you think you are very clever, after all you architected a whole fresh new method of software deployment for your garbage Operating System that is still based on Windows NT. ..... Please reconsider your life choices and just throw this entire Microsoft store into the bin where it belongs, far away from enterprise machines where system admins live and don't have time to learn how your misguided application system design works." Interestingly, each and every one of these posts has been overwhelmingly upvoted by others in the sysadmin subreddit, indicating that these resonated with them. Of course, not everyone likely agrees, but they are probably in the minority. We also know Neowin is visited and read by many IT admins as well. Let us know in the comments below whether you feel the same way or whether you think they are simply overblown reactions from some frustrated, or perhaps overworked, employees. Source: Reddit (link1, link2, link3)
    • If you need Adobe Air, it's not dead actually. https://airsdk.harman.com/runtime  
  • Recent Achievements

    • Reacting Well
      Gideon Waxfarb earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • First Post
      NovaEdgeX earned a badge
      First Post
    • One Month Later
      pahariyaseo earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      pahariyaseo earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      hadiaali45 earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      419
    2. 2
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      141
    3. 3
      Nick H.
      90
    4. 4
      +Edouard
      80
    5. 5
      Steven P.
      77
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!