• 0

Visual Studio .NET 2003

Asked by SnowBlizzard,

 Share

Question

Enthusiast

SnowBlizzard

Posted
Posted

I got Microsoft Visual Studio .NET 2003 Enterprise Architect Version CD for my academic use. However, if I install Enterprise Architect Version, it require .NET Framework 1.1, Java SDK, and other components to be installed before VS .NET Enterprise Architect can be installed... These components consumed alot of space and resource on my computer...I don't want these components... I prefer Professional Version...So is it possible to modify the version from "Enterprise Architect" to "Professional"? Then I can have "Professional Version" so that I don't need to install these unnecessary components... Anyone who know how to modify the version i.e changing the setup files or system files to install as "Professional Version"?

Link to comment
https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/165417-visual-studio-net-2003/
Share on other sites

15 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

  • 0
Veteran

reactionary007

Posted
Posted

all versions of visual studio.net require the dot net framework and a bunch of other stuff to run. those are the runtimes that run the apps you write! as far as i know the prerequisites are no different for pro than they are for enterprise architect.

  • 0
Enthusiast

SnowBlizzard

Posted
  • Author
Posted
  DarkLordSouron said:
awh man why did you got the architect version anyways

the pro. version is alot cheaper

Erm...My school lent me CD to let me install...but I see another student installing MS Visual Studio .NET Professional 2003 on his laptop without installing these components... I mean I look at them in "Add/Remove Program"...

Yup..I know Professional is cheaper than Enterprise Architect...

  • 0
Enthusiast

SnowBlizzard

Posted
  • Author
Posted
  area91 said:
They are the same files in all editions! Also, its not the Java SDK it installs, its the J# .net runtime!

Why you must shout at me using exclaimation stop?

Oops...I know it is Visual J# .NET Redistributable Package...I was too busy so I typed "Java SDK"..

  • 0
Enthusiast

SnowBlizzard

Posted
  • Author
Posted
  reactionary007 said:
all versions of visual studio.net require the dot net framework and a bunch of other stuff to run. those are the runtimes that run the apps you write! as far as i know the prerequisites are no different for pro than they are for enterprise architect.

But I checked other student's laptop with MS Visual Studio Professional installed...In "Add/Remove Program", I don't see "MS Framework 1.1 .NET" and "MS Visual J# .NET" being listed...I only see "MS Visual Studio .NET 2003 Professional" being listed...

  • 0
Proficient

scoult01

Posted
Posted

Now, if you actually read the install screens when you installed it you would see that those items are PREREQUISETS and MUST be installed for .NET to run.

And if you were really smart you would have ordered it for free from the Microsoft website and got a 60 day trial version for free on dvd in the mail... But instead you had to waste the $1600+ (aus) on it. Ah well.

  • 0
Enthusiast

SnowBlizzard

Posted
  • Author
Posted
  scoult01 said:
Now, if you actually read the install screens when you installed it you would see that those items are PREREQUISETS and MUST be installed for .NET to run.

And if you were really smart you would have ordered it for free from the Microsoft website and got a 60 day trial version for free on dvd in the mail... But instead you had to waste the $1600+ (aus) on it. Ah well.

Well, I got it...But what I know the difference between 2 versions is that Enterprise Architect Version consumed more resource and space than Professional Version. Am I correct? If not, please correct me and clarify the difference between Enterprise Architect and Professional...Thanks...

Noooooo....I did not buy it..I mean my school give me Enterprise Architect CD through Volume License for Academic Use...

  • 0
Neowinian

hemi

Posted
Posted

snowblizzard, the .NET framework must be installed for you to install Visual Studio.NET. The applications that you will be creating using VS will depend this framework, so it must be installed. On the other hand, I don't think the J# redistributable package has to be installed, as long as you deselect the J# option in the VS install process. I could be wrong though, since I always install J#.

And to all of you who are telling him not to waste money on the Enterprise edition, maybe you should read the thread before you post. He got Enterprise free from school, he didn't pay anything for it.

  • 0
Rising Star

8tImER

Posted
Posted
  hemi said:
snowblizzard, the .NET framework must be installed for you to install Visual Studio.NET. The applications that you will be creating using VS will depend this framework, so it must be installed. On the other hand, I don't think the J# redistributable package has to be installed, as long as you deselect the J# option in the VS install process. I could be wrong though, since I always install J#.

You can't deselect J# before you have installed the J# runtime ;)

Step 1 Prerequesites

Step 2 Select what you want (and remove the J# runtime after the installation completes. Just like frontpage extensions and stuff)

And the applications won't depend on the .NET framework, if he doesn't use .NET languages.

(E.g. he just installs VC++ like I did. No program you'd build with that should need the .NET framework unless you explicitly use something that's part of .NET (if that is even possible with plain C++ (I guess it is))).

  • 0
Collaborator

Tokhra

Posted
Posted

you HAVE to install the .NET Framework to run ANY version of VS.NET, and more importantly, if you dont have the .NET framework the apps you write wont even run anyway (unless you write a pure C++ appthat doesnt use any .NET features).

The professional version DOES make you install the .NET Framework, though im not sure about the J# Redist Package but the J# one isnt that big i dont think.

As for it consuming more space, you can select what components you want to install in the installer anyway, so just dont install some of the more advanced features. The major advantage of Enterprise Architect over Pro is its SQL Server integration anyway, there arnt that many other differences.

  • 0
Enthusiast

SnowBlizzard

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Ooo...Sorry....Take my apologize...I did not know that these components are NEEDED to be installed before VS .NET can be installed...Coz I have not installed MS VS .NET Enterprise Architect yet even though I have CD with me...Now, I got it...Thanks all of you for your great advice...Hmmm...I guess I am satisfied with Enterprise Architect since Enterprise Architect is about the same as Professional... Anyway, I will install it now :D

  • 0
Enthusiast

SnowBlizzard

Posted
  • Author
Posted
  hemi said:
That's true about the unmanaged VC++ programs 8tImER, but I was assuming that he was more interested in the managed languages like C# and VB.NET.

That's correct...I am learning C++ and Visual Basic in my collegue...As for Java# - not now but maybe in future when I have mastered C++ and VB.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to question listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Posts

    • It's a feature, not a bug: Windows Hello face unlock no longer works in the dark

      By ZipZapRap · Posted

      Geez, this is dumb. I use my laptop sometimes in the dark when doing astrophotography to control my astro-PC... this explains why I have to keep entering my PIN when logging back in. So stupid. I can't see the keyboard in the dark, and I can't have lights everywhere to light it up because everything is very light sensitive (including my eyes!).
    • Intel Nova Lake alleged performance shows massive improvement, could answer AMD 3D V-cache

      By ThaCrip · Posted

      Naturally. I don't care about brand loyalty at all as it's all about price/performance/reliability etc (even what RejZoR said below is a great point to). basically bang-for-the-buck. because at the end of the day... one wants the cheapest possible price to maintain a certain minimum level of performance (or thereabouts). because generally after a certain point with CPU and GPU's the price starts to sky rocket without that much difference in performance where it really matters. p.s. historically I have bought more Intel CPU's and NVIDIA GPU's but I have had some AMD CPU's and one AMD GPU.
    • Intel Nova Lake alleged performance shows massive improvement, could answer AMD 3D V-cache

      By JayZJay · Posted

      Both of these companies as well as Qualcomm and Apple need competition. Otherwise, they just coast. I don't prefer macOS, though I like some of Apple's hardware, but if anyone needs competition, it is Apple. Their prices are already outrageous and they need to have a reason to produce good hardware and at least keep prices remotely reasonable. (It is criminal what they charge for RAM upgrades especially.) Qualcomm needs to push AMD and Intel not to be so sloppy with the performance/efficiency aspect. Granted, AMD has been doing quite well in this respect considering they are not an ARM architecture. I personally want to have more options that truly compete with Macbook Air and Macbook Pro's on the Windows side. It is difficult to achieve what Apple does since they control the entire stack and that is fundamentally different for Windows PCs other than maybe Microsoft Surface PCs.
    • Intel Nova Lake alleged performance shows massive improvement, could answer AMD 3D V-cache

      By fintechfooty · Posted

      Lets gooo!
    • The $80 video game - A new frontier of cost, or a bridge too far?

      By EdwardFranciscoVilla · Posted

      I would not mind paying 120 up to 150 dollars in this economy value of the dollar currency if their video game is quite breathtaking and excellent use of my hard earned work money. I think people need to appreciate all the effort workers and time that goes into excellent and worthy video games. Now if only the publishers and companies behind the video games would share the love with the developers those at the bottom of work making such games happen as in increase their money accounts and give them a more richer life that I wish would have happened . But how companies have bad reputation of being $$$ profit greedy I feel sad if there are any developers that feel unappreciated as in no real compensation for all the hours of work they put into a blockbuster hit . Have a great day everyone . Thank you developers engineers and programmers that make superb video games happen . You have my thanksgiving and I hope you really really appreciate my words . With you all about this

  • Recent Achievements

    • Week One Done
      Hartej earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Year In
      TsunadeMama earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Week One Done
      shaheen earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Dedicated
      Cole Multipass earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • Week One Done
      Alexander 001 earned a badge
      Week One Done

  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      572
    2. 2
      ATLien_0
      184
    3. 3
      +FloatingFatMan
      182
    4. 4
      Skyfrog
      111
    5. 5
      Som
      106
    Show More

  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!