Geeks With Blogs
Tangible Thoughts SharePoint, MOSS? and all the other questions

Check out

Its the community site for everything 3.0 in the framework.

To tell you the honest truth I spent some good time trying to understand this 3.0 business.

"I mean you take the 2.0 Framework, you add Avalon, Indigo etc and then call it .NET Framework 3.0. But in fact its nothing more than .NET 2.0 (Compiler, run time etc.) with additions."

So overall when you get the .NET Framework 3.0 you will not be getting the language enhancements in C# 3.0, VB.NET 3.0, you will not be getting the 3.0 compilers.

Overall thats a bad decision. MS get your head in gear.

Whats bad about it is that it causes confusion. For instance it took me x amount of time to figure what this all was about. It really shouldnt be that way. It should have been a naturual evolution, and if I am confused just imagine how this going to sit with actual customers.

There is a lot of comments/disapproval at Somarsegar's and Jason Zander's blog.

And I agree with Wasim Sadiq on Microsoft screwing up totally cool names.

But does all these add-ons require a major versioning change to .NET? I guess the bigger question is could the .NET Framework do without them, and the answer is yes (we have 2.0).

It would have made more sense to call it .NET Framework 2.0 with .NET Framework Extensions 1.0 (similar to what Dragan Sretenovic mentioned on Jason's blog) and then merge both to 3.0 when the framework actually goes up to 3.0. But to take an existing 2.0 and rename it to 3.0 is just nonsense.

And Edmundo T. Mendiola raises some good points on Somarsegar's blog. Just to quote him

"Better make it clear across all sites in Microsoft and MSDN that .Net Framework 3.0 is the next version and that VB/C#.Net 3.0 are not the real VB/C#.Net 3.0. Unless you can promise to deliver them with .Net Framework 3.0. "

And he's damn right!

But I dont see Microsoft revoking this decision.

Technorati :

Cross-posted from

Posted on Monday, June 19, 2006 10:22 AM .NET | Back to top

Comments on this post: .NET 3.0 = 2.0? Oh God! My head hurts.

# re: .NET 3.0 = 2.0? Oh God! My head hurts.
Requesting Gravatar...
I agree! Microsoft should get their act together. It is just plain silly to give .NET a version of 3 without the framework being at that level.

Left by htor on Jun 24, 2006 9:39 AM

Your comment:
 (will show your gravatar)

Copyright © Tariq | Powered by: