.NET 2.0 还是 3.5?

发布于 2024-07-07 18:15:37 字数 223 浏览 12 评论 0 原文

我们的客户使用我们软件的 vb6 版本。

我们正在将它们升级到用 C# 编写的 .NET 应用程序...

使用 .net 2.0 的体积是否比使用 .net 3.5 的体积要小?

我对更小体积的定义是:更小的尺寸、更短的安装时间等等。

无论如何,他们中的大多数人可能已经有了 2.0。

我问这个问题只是因为我想在 3.5 中利用 LINQ。

Our clients use a vb6 version of our software.

We are upgrading them to a .NET application written in C#...

Is there less bulk using .net 2.0 than .net 3.5?

My definition of less bulk would be: Smaller size, smaller installation time, etc.

Most of them probably already have 2.0 anyway.

I only ask because I would like to take advantage of LINQ in 3.5.

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。

扫码二维码加入Web技术交流群

发布评论

需要 登录 才能够评论, 你可以免费 注册 一个本站的账号。

评论(12

马蹄踏│碎落叶 2024-07-14 18:15:37

为了利用 LINQ,您需要 3.5(除非您想在 2.0 中使用 LINQBridge )。

对于较小的安装程序,.Net 3.5 Sp1 有一个名为“客户资料”。

.NET Framework 客户端配置文件设置仅包含 .NET Framework 中通常用于客户端应用程序方案的那些程序集和文件。 例如:它包括 Windows 窗体、WPF 和 WCF。 它不包括 ASP.NET 以及主要用于服务器场景的库和组件。 我们预计此安装包的大小约为 26MB,并且其下载和安装速度比完整的 .NET Framework 安装包快得多。

For taking advantage of LINQ, you need 3.5 (unless you want to use LINQBridge with 2.0).

For a smaller installer, .Net 3.5 Sp1 has a new feature called "Client Profile".

The .NET Framework Client Profile setup contains just those assemblies and files in the .NET Framework that are typically used for client application scenarios. For example: it includes Windows Forms, WPF, and WCF. It does not include ASP.NET and those libraries and components used primarily for server scenarios. We expect this setup package to be about 26MB in size, and it can be downloaded and installed much quicker than the full .NET Framework setup package.

爱的那么颓废 2024-07-14 18:15:37
  1. 安装 .NET 3.5 不只是为了节省几 Mb 的内存,这真的比通过 LINQ 和其他 .NET 3.5 功能大幅提高工作效率更重要吗?

  2. 为什么在技术上起步落后?

  1. Is not installing .NET 3.5 just to save a few Mb really that much more important that gaining a huge increase in productivity with LINQ and other .NET 3.5 features?

  2. Why start off behind in technology?

や莫失莫忘 2024-07-14 18:15:37

.Net 3.5 运行时约为 50Mb。 2.0 运行时约为 23Mb。

但如果您控制部署或安装,那确实不应该成为问题。 对于“客户”与“客户”而言尤其如此,“客户”一词涉及持续的个人关系。 如果有的话,给他们寄一张 CD。 那么任何低于 700Mb 的东西都是一样的。

The .Net 3.5 runtime is ~50Mb. The 2.0 runtime is ~23Mb.

But if you control the deployment or installation, that really shouldn't be an issue. This is especially true for 'clients' vs 'customers', and the word client involves and on-going, personal relationship. If it comes to it, send them a CD. Then anything under 700Mb is all the same.

ㄟ。诗瑗 2024-07-14 18:15:37

查看 LINQBridge:
http://www.albahari.com/nutshell/linqbridge.aspx

添加 LINQ 支持到 .net 2(.net 3.5 仍然使用 CLR 2.0)。

Check out LINQBridge:
http://www.albahari.com/nutshell/linqbridge.aspx

Adding LINQ support to .net 2 (.net 3.5 still uses CLR 2.0).

夜巴黎 2024-07-14 18:15:37

.NET 3.5 是 .NET 2.0 + 更多的库和扩展,所以是的,安装更大。 然而,在我看来,额外的体积是非常值得的,因为它为你提供了额外的东西。

.NET 3.5 is .NET 2.0 + more libraries and extensions, so yes, the install is bigger. In my opinion however, it is very much worth the extra bulk because of the extra stuff it gives you.

大海や 2024-07-14 18:15:37

如果它是 VB6 应用程序,您应该检查该应用程序当前使用的 Windows 版本,并相应地选择 .Net 版本。 AFAIK 3.5 不能在 W2K 上运行。

If it's a VB6 app, you should check which Windows versions the app is currently used on, and select the .Net version accordingly. AFAIK 3.5 does not run on W2K.

鸠魁 2024-07-14 18:15:37

如果您想利用 LINQ,那么请选择 3.5! 我发现自己使用它时并没有更多的“批量”,但除非您想使用 LINQ,否则两者都可以。

If you would like to take advantage of LINQ, then go for 3.5! I find there's not more 'bulk' when using it myself, but unless you want to use LINQ, then either is fine.

鲜肉鲜肉永远不皱 2024-07-14 18:15:37

请记住,某些操作系统 (Windows 2000 Server) 不允许您安装 .NET 3.0 或 3.5,因此您可能必须坚持使用 2.0。

Keep in mind that certain OSes (Windows 2000 Server) won't let you install .NET 3.0 or 3.5, so you may have to stick with 2.0 for that reason.

九八野马 2024-07-14 18:15:37

我建议你直接使用 Visual Studio 2008 和 .net 3.5 sp1,
2.0是3.5的基础,您可以轻松地开始使用2.0,然后开始使用3.5的功能。

此外,3.5 SP1 还对 2.0 框架进行了一些调整,这是很好的。

I would suggest that you go straight with visual studio 2008 and .net 3.5 sp1,
2.0 is the basis of 3.5 and you can easily start using 2.0 and then start to use 3.5 functionalities.

Furthermore 3.5 SP1 also brings tweaks to the 2.0 framework which are nice to have.

挽清梦 2024-07-14 18:15:37

我建议你直接升级到 3.5,因为你将不那么遥远(在未来......在 3-5 年内)更改为其他版本的框架。 如果 5 年后 .Net 达到版本 5,那么跳跃将会更小。 所以,我建议你从VB6到3.5。

框架的大小不是很高,不到60兆......现在我认为没什么大不了的。

I suggest you to go directly to 3.5 because you will be less far away (in the future ... in 3-5 years) to change to other version of framework. If in 5 year .Net is at version 5, the jump will be smaller to do. So, VB6 to 3.5 is what I suggest you.

The size of the framework is not very high, less than 60 megs... not a big deal now I think.

﹂绝世的画 2024-07-14 18:15:37

另请注意,根据您安装的 .NET 框架,有多少额外的容量可能无关紧要。 从现代角度来看,.NET Framework 的安装量相对较小。

至于LINQ,它将节省你大量的时间和精力,并提供一种快速获取数据的方法。 然而,这也取决于应用程序将分发到的客户端。

我想说的是,除非出于某种原因对客户端存在另一个主要障碍,否则请使用 3.5。

Also note, depending were you install the .NET framework it might be irrelevant how much extra bulk there is. The .NET Framework installs are relatively small in modern terms.

As for LINQ, it will save you a lot of time and effort, and offers a quick way to get at data. However it also depends on the clients the application will be distributed out to.

I'd say at that, go with 3.5 unless there is another major roadblock on the clients for whatever reason.

烟若柳尘 2024-07-14 18:15:37

正如其他人所指出的,.NET 3.5 安装比 .NET 2.0 更长、更大。 请记住,.NET 3.0 和 .NET 3.5 都是 .NET 2.0 CLR 之上的扩展。

我仍然会说从VB6直接升级到.NET 3.5(实际上是.NET 3.5 SP1)和VS2008,只要你的客户端操作系统支持该版本的Framework(否则你将需要选择最低的通用Framework版本,这非常很可能是.NET 2.0)。 从长远来看,您将为自己节省大量时间/精力。

As others have pointed out, the .NET 3.5 install is longer and larger than .NET 2.0. Keep in mind that .NET 3.0 and .NET 3.5 are both extensions on top of the .NET 2.0 CLR.

I would still say upgrade from VB6 directly to .NET 3.5 (actually .NET 3.5 SP1) and VS2008, as long as your client operating systems support that version of the Framework (otherwise you will need to choose the lowest common Framework version, which very well may be .NET 2.0). You will save yourself a lot of time/effort in the long run.

~没有更多了~
我们使用 Cookies 和其他技术来定制您的体验包括您的登录状态等。通过阅读我们的 隐私政策 了解更多相关信息。 单击 接受 或继续使用网站,即表示您同意使用 Cookies 和您的相关数据。
原文