MS 会在 .Net 4.* 或 5.* 中放弃对 XP 的支持吗？
当前和较新版本的 .Net 不支持 Windows 2000 对开发人员来说重要吗？
想到我的一些客户仍在使用 Windows 2000，我感到很害怕，尽管我可能有一天会决定停止支持 Windows 2000，但我不喜欢 Microsoft 将其推广到人们的产品上。
有人会认为微软将来会在 XP 上这样做以刺激 Vista 及更高版本的销售吗？
只是澄清一下，这绝不是对微软的攻击，我喜欢微软，但这是一个真正的担忧，我想听听大家的意见。
相比之下，我看不到 C++0x 实现者说“它在 Windows 2000 上不起作用”。
我确实在努力说服自己应该切换到 .Net，但这是我的担忧之一。
Does it matter to developers that the current, and newer versions of .Net don't support windows 2000?
It scares me to think that several of my clients still use Windows 2000 and although I may decide to stop supporting Windows 2000 one day, I don't like that Microsoft is pushing it on people's products.
Could anyone see Microsoft doing this with XP in the future to spur sales of Vista and later?
Just to clarify, this is not a bashing of MS in any way, I love MS, but it is a genuine concern that I would like opinions on.
In contrast I can't see C++0x implementors saying "it won't work on windows 2000"
I'm really trying to convince myself that I should be switching to .Net but this is one of my concerns.
如果你对这篇内容有疑问，欢迎到本站社区发帖提问 参与讨论，获取更多帮助，或者扫码二维码加入 Web 技术交流群。
绑定邮箱获取回复消息
由于您还没有绑定你的真实邮箱，如果其他用户或者作者回复了您的评论，将不能在第一时间通知您！
发布评论
评论（8）
如果您看看最近的技术创新，特别是基于 Atom 处理器的上网本，我认为 XP 还会与我们共存一段时间，因为该套件中的大多数不运行 Vista。 同样，在移动市场中，除了 Windows CE 变体之外，我们还有嵌入式 XP，而不是 Vista。 虽然戴尔等主要制造商仍在推出 新套件，不支持 Vista，XP 继续存在，
If you look at recent technical innovations, notably Netbooks based on Atom processors, I think XP will be with us for a while yet, as most of this kit doesn't run Vista. Similarly in the mobile market, outside of Windows CE varients, we have XP embedded, not Vista. While major manufacturers, such as Dell, are still introducing new kit that doesn't support Vista, XP is here to stay,
因为我最近经历过这个，所以这里是微软声明的支持指南。
生命周期指南。
仅供参考，对 XP 的支持至少应该持续到 2010 年，如果他们愿意支付支持费用，可能还会持续几年。 那么 .Net 3[4].XX 可以在 XP 上运行吗？ 有可能，但是谁知道呢？ Win2k 是一个非常古老的系统，操作系统中缺少一些东西。 放手吧。
Since I've gone through this recently here is Microsoft's stated support guidelines.
Lifecycle guidance.
FYI support for XP should go through at least 2010 and if they are willing to pay for support possibly another few years. Will .Net 3[4].XX work on XP then? Possibly, but who is to know? Win2k is a very old system at this point and there are things that are just missing form the OS. Let it go.
我的想法是这样的：
老实说，我不太确定您担心什么。
顺便说一句，有一些方法可以在仅安装 .NET 2.0 的情况下使用 .NET 3.5 Framework 功能，并且已经在一些 SO 问题中涵盖了。
Well here's what I think:
Honestly, I'm not really sure what you're worried about.
BTW, there are ways to use the .NET 3.5 Framework features with only .NET 2.0 installed, and it has been covered in some SO questions already.
无论您使用什么技术堆栈，“支持最新功能”和“保持向后兼容性”之间总是存在紧张关系。 在哪里进行权衡很大程度上取决于您正在构建的产品类型以及您拥有的客户类型。
我曾经使用 C++ 和 SQL 开发一个仓库管理应用程序，并且我们总是必须支持 SQL Server“当前版本”的至少两个版本，因为我们的客户非常不愿意升级。
No matter what technology stack you're using, there's always going to be a tension between "supporting the latest features" and "maintaining backwards compatibility". Where to make that tradeoff depends largely on the type of product you're building and the type of customers you have.
I used to develop a warehouse management application using C++ and SQL, and we always had to support at least two versions back from the "current version" of SQL Server because our customers were extremely reluctant to upgrade.
我想这很大程度上取决于公司。 例如，我一直在使用 IBM 和 Microsoft 混合技术，我们的客户拥有这个非常非常旧的 AS400 平台，他们甚至不支持数据库上的事务或关系，但这些大公司投入了大量时间和他们的系统上有钱，他们希望保持这种状态。
我们所做的是添加一个层，以便他们可以在网站上使用这些信息。 我不认为 IBM 会抛弃它的客户，他们仍然开发软件组件来连接到这些旧技术，例如 .Net，并且我相信如果 Microsoft 进行研究并发现他们有许多客户仍在使用 Windows 2000，他们也会这样做。您可能不具备最新技术的所有功能，但至少我很确定他们将与其最新技术保持一层兼容性。 告诉一家拥有超过 1 万名员工并投入数百万美元的公司只是切换到最新的操作系统或数据库系统并不容易，因为对他们来说这是没有意义的，相信我，即使微软希望你购买最现代的他们不会停止支持他们的旧技术，特别是如果这些大公司向他们施压，要求他们保持遗留系统的兼容性或购买对方公司的解决方案。
I guess it greatly depends upon the company. For example, I've been working with mixed IBM and Microsoft technologies and our customer has this AS400 platform which is very very old, they don't even support transactions or relations on their database but these big companies have invested a lot of time and money on their systems and they want to keep them like that.
What we done is to add a layer so they can use this information on a website. I dont see IBM leaving its customers behind, they still develop software componets to connect to these old techologies for .Net for exmaple and I believe Microsoft will do the same if they do a research and found that they have many customers still using Windows 2000. You might not have all the features of the newest technologies but at least im pretty sure they will maintain a layer of compatibility for it with their newest technologies. Its not easy to tell a company of more than 10k employees and millions of dollars invested to just switch to the newest OS or Database system, for they it wouldn't make sense and believe me, even when Microsoft wants you to buy the most modern software they won't stop supporting their old technologies especially if these big companies pressure them to either keep their legacy systems compatible or buying the other's company solution.
由于问题在我上次回复后发生了变化，我将补充一点，对 Windows 2k 的 3.0 和 3.5 支持并未“毫无警告”地被放弃。 有很多迹象表明这种情况在测试结束之前就发生了，所以我认为这个问题在这方面的措辞确实不公平。
Since the question changed after my last response, I'll add that 3.0 and 3.5 support for Windows 2k wasn't dropped "without warning". There was plenty of indication this was happening before the betas were ended, so I don't think the question is really worded fairly in this regard.
考虑到微软在这件事上有双重利益（向你出售新操作系统和生产.NET框架），我会非常怀疑。
事实上，您将能够使用 Mono 在旧操作系统上支持新的 .NET 版本，它几乎被设计为跨平台和向后兼容。
Considering that Microsoft has a double interest in this matter (selling you the new OS and producing the .NET framework), I would be very suspicious.
In actual fact, you will be able to support new .NET versions on older OSes using Mono, which is pretty much designed to be cross-platform and backwards-compatible.
支持旧操作系统需要花钱。 这并不一定是为了刺激新系统的销售，而是为了避免在他们已经停止支持的旧系统上运行的成本。 正如 Windows 2000 支持已经结束一样，Windows XP 支持、Vista 支持和 Windows 7 支持等也将结束。在不再以任何其他方式支持的操作系统上继续支持 .NET 框架似乎并不明智。
编辑：为了解决这样的问题：由于 .NET 2.0 和较新的框架版本的 CLR 是相同的，因此限制是人为的。 虽然它仍然在相同的 CLR 上工作，但这并不意味着他们添加的所有支持都将在 Windows 2000 上有效地工作。需要考虑性能和硬件，我认为考虑到 Windows 2000 的年龄和一些由于 3.0 和 3.5 框架中添加了更多密集功能，因此放弃 WIndows 2k 是一个合理的决定。
每当我们作为开发人员考虑支持特定的用户群时，都必须考虑添加额外的用户群所需的资源，而不是支持他们的好处。 测试、错误修复和支持成本都必须考虑在内。由于 Windows 2000 不再提供任何安全更新，因此他们需要恢复专门针对 .NET 更新的更新机制。 我怀疑在这种情况下，收益不会超过成本。 因此，我认为 Microsoft 应该人为地阻止较新的框架在 Windows 2000 上运行，因为这样可以节省这些额外的成本。
Supporting older operating systems costs money. It's not necessarily a push to spur sales of new systems so much as avoiding the cost of trying to make things work on old systems that they've already ceased supporting. Just as Windows 2000 support has ended, so will Windows XP support, and Vista support, and Windows 7 support, etc etc. Continuing to support the .NET framework on operating systems that are no longer supported in any other way does not seem prudent.
EDIT: To address the notion that since the CLR is the same for .NET 2.0 and the newer framework versions, the restriction was artificial. Although it is still working on the same CLR, that doesn't mean that all the support they've added will effectively work on Windows 2000. There are performance and hardware considerations to be made and I think considering the age of Windows 2000 and some of the more intensive features added to 3.0 and 3.5 frameworks, it was a reasonable decision to abandon WIndows 2k.
Whenever we as developers consider supporting a particular user-base, there has to be a consideration of the resources needed to add that additional user-base over the benefits of supporting them. Testing, bug fixing, and support costs have to be factored in. As Windows 2000 is no longer given any security updates, they would need to resurrect an update mechanism just for .NET updates. I suspect that the benefits do not outweigh the costs in this scenario. It therefore makes sense to me that Microsoft should artificially prevent newer frameworks from running on Windows 2000 as they are then saving themselves these additional costs.