Template talk:.NET Framework version history/Archive 1: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 06:19, 5 January 2021

Latest revision as of 06:01, 18 December 2022

(2 intermediate revisions by one other user not shown)

Line 1:

{{automatic archive navigator}}

{{aan}}

== Semi-protected edit request on 19 March 2014 ==

Line 24:

http://blogs.msdn.com/b/dotnet/archive/2014/05/05/announcing-the-net-framework-4-5-2-release.aspx

:Done, thanks. [[User:S.Örvarr.S|Stefán Örvar Sigmundsson]] ([[User talk:S.Örvarr.S|talk]]) 17:03, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

== What kinda release of Windows Server 2003 distribute .net framework 2.0? ==

I just wish this is Wikipedia.org not Microsoft Official website! Fact is just Fact, should never be modified.

Windows Server 2003 was released in year 2003, when .net framework 2.0 was not about releasing at all. For the ever Windows .net Server, the .net framework 1.1 was the default .net framework included in the Windows Server 2003 installation media, also the dot net framework 1.0 was included on the Windows XP Service Pack 1 media. They might be just the partial, runtime or demonstration but they were there, and that is the fact. This is the section to tell the history, why should be affected by anything that is meaningless at all?! <small><span class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Janagewen|Janagewen]] ([[User talk:Janagewen|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Janagewen|contribs]]) 02:54, 13 August 2014 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned -->

:Hello, {{u|Janagewen}}

:Do you have proof in the form of [[WP:RS|reliable secondary source]]? If yes, then all your problems are solved.

:Best regards,

:[[User:Codename Lisa|Codename Lisa]] ([[User talk:Codename Lisa|talk]]) 20:32, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

:I removed what I posted here because of your behaviours, and I got a warning about being blocked here! That is for what? I think you, Codename List, had better show respect to yourself before anything. You could do anything to my account without needing telling me again and again. I don't want to have any biz with you, Codename Lisa! [[User:Janagewen|Janagewen]] ([[User talk:Janagewen|talk]]) 01:37, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

According to MS FAQ<ref>https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/help/17455/lifecycle-support-policy-faq-net-framework</ref> in the 10th question "What is the Support Lifecycle policy for the different versions of .NET Framework?", ".NET Framework 1.1 SP1 will continue to be supported until end of support of Windows Server 2003 SP2 (with 32-bit only, not 64-bit)."

That's confirm 1.1 SP1 to have been delivered within the SP2 of Windows Server 2003.

And if .NET 2.0 is new in 2003 R2 (6th note in the template), it means it is NOT part of 2003, isn't it? <small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/195.65.52.7|195.65.52.7]] ([[User talk:195.65.52.7#top|talk]]) 13:06, 23 August 2016 (UTC)</small>

:I am so glad that you paid attention to this topic. Definitely, .net framework 2.0 is not part of Windows Server 2003, but an integrated part of Windows Server 2003 R2. I should have to make clear another thing, .net framework 1.1 SP1 is not delivered by SP2 of Windows Server 2003, but an integrated part too. Sorry to reply late, but late is better than never come. -- Aaron Janagewen [[Special:Contributions/139.210.139.160|139.210.139.160]] ([[User talk:139.210.139.160|talk]]) 13:08, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

::{{tq|"That's confirm 1.1 SP1 to have been delivered within the SP2 of Windows Server 2003."}}

::'''Bzzzt! Wrong.''' That only proves the support policy is aligned for the convenience of the supporter.

::{{tq|"And if .NET 2.0 is new in 2003 R2 [...]"}}

::Says who? The source says it isn't. It says it was included in 2003. Why don't you guys level that with Microsoft? Wikipedia is a downstream publisher anyway.

::Best regards,

::[[User:Codename Lisa|Codename Lisa]] ([[User talk:Codename Lisa|talk]]) 14:45, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

Why not just check the installer media for RTM, SP1, SP2, R2, Enterprise, Standard, and so on variations, and make a table? There's official checksums for the images MS supplied people. Heck, you can even still download a lot of them if you have the right accounts. Anyone got legal access to official media and not just unapproved pirated copies(granted, byte-for-byte copies of exact same disc images)? You don't even need a new PC, just install in a VM. BTW: Physical media is not really popular, anymore for those that wonder why I mention disc images. [[Special:Contributions/73.95.135.127|73.95.135.127]] ([[User talk:73.95.135.127|talk]]) 11:20, 6 July 2019 (UTC)

{{reflist-talk}}

== What Does "DISTRIBUTED" Really Mean in This Template? ==

Line 56 ⟶ 84:

:::Best regards,

:::[[User:Codename Lisa|Codename Lisa]] ([[User talk:Codename Lisa|talk]]) 01:17, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

: I think this template should make readers clear rather than confusion, so I replace "Included in" with "AS COMPANION or AS PART". So for that, I also put Windows XP with Service Pack 1 onto the list too. Windows XP Tablet Edition and Windows XP Media Center use .net framework 1.0 as part of them, and they are both the products happened after Service Pack 1 released. I change the "Replace" to "Overtake", because that is the more exact word to describe the relationship among them, and correct the Windows Server 2003 R2 as the first OS to put it on the installation media. I don't want to incur meaningless argument but just want to make readers clear about the fact about .net framework and Windows. People who will revert my change should provide enough and strong proofs ahead of ahead! [[User:Janagewen|Janagewen]] ([[User talk:Janagewen|talk]]) 03:20, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

:: My last revision is [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:.NET_Framework_version_history&oldid=623667384 this]. For this modification I remove some unnecessary denotations such as "SP2" following with "Windows Server 2008" and "SP1" with "Windows Server 2008 R2". They possibly mislead the readers about the fact of .net framework with them, and wrong to tell the fact. I also add a comment to Windows XP with Service Pack 1, and that is true. People who are eager about adding reference, please find the information to prove it and improving this template... [[User:Janagewen|Janagewen]] ([[User talk:Janagewen|talk]]) 05:18, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

::: [[WP:V|The source]] says they are necessary. And do learn some English please. [[User:FleetCommand|Fleet Command]] ([[User talk:FleetCommand|talk]]) 05:32, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

== Before reverting or changing... ==

Leave your reasons or proofs to reverting or modifying the main article! This is Wikipedia.org, we should maintain the right of everyone to work together... [[User:Janagewen|Janagewen]] ([[User talk:Janagewen|talk]]) 05:30, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

:And you are violating the right of everyone to edit. Per [[WP:BRD]], if you are reverted, you are not allowed to counter-revert. This is exactly what you are doing and it is called [[WP:EW|edit warring]]. [[User:FleetCommand|Fleet Command]] ([[User talk:FleetCommand|talk]]) 05:36, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

: For you, [[User:FleetCommand|Fleet Command]], do learn self-respect! OK? [[User:Janagewen|Janagewen]] ([[User talk:Janagewen|talk]]) 06:16, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

== Removal of column Supersedes ==

Line 85 ⟶ 117:

:Greeting, [[User:S.Örvarr.S|Stefán Örvar Sigmundsson]],

:<s>I've made another revision in my own ([[User talk:Janagewen|talk page]]), if you are free, please make suggestions there. </s>

:<s>P.S. I don't want to argue or make any edit on this article on Wikipedia.org English, I would improve it to fit for other languages Wikipedia.org.</s> [[User:Janagewen|Janagewen]] ([[User talk:Janagewen|talk]]) 23:05, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

::Problems: