The article spawning this tread is at best misleading.
1.) I have not managed to get .Net to install via the setUp projects within Studio DotNet. No DotNet framework on the computer, no running of a SetUp project created in DotNet. This is so even if a dependency on the DotNet framework is added to the SetUp project. If a DotNet framework does exist on the user's computer it will update the DotNet framework to the version specified in the dependency, but as stated above - No DotNet framework: No running of a DotNet SetUp project. (Perhaps I am doing something wrong but that has been my experience.)
2.) The Microsoft article "HOW TO: Determine Whether a Client Meets the Minimum Requirements for Installing the .NET Framework" ( http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;815177#7 ) lists several Updates that must be present on the user's computer for DotNet to function correctly. (This article fails to mention that if you update the MDAC to greater then 2.6 you also have to ensure that a JetSP40 is installed. Thanx for leaving that up to us. I love searching Microsoft's documentation).
If starting from a fairly clean system, a total of 5 system updates and reboots may be required prior to the installation of DotNet. If a customer has a low bandwidth or worse no connection to the internet at all ( as several of my customer's do in order to keep privileged data off-line) then this becomes an issue.
Searching Microsoft's documentation for the pitfalls and issues in updating a user's computer is like searching for a book in a library with all its materials tossed haphazardly on the floor. Articles completely disassociated with each other, not linked to each other and not accounted for, give warnings to pratfalls associated with updates required to get the DotNet FrameWork installed and operating properly. Specifically Microsoft wants nothing to do with updating the MDAC because it knows serious issues could arise on the user's computers and they do not want to be held responsible. Well it is their software and they should be responsible. The DotNet framework is not the end of DLL hell because the updates required to get the DotNet framework operational have the potential of breaking other applications running on the user's computer.
I am a application developer who was seduced by microsoft to develop applications with DotNet. Unfortunately, in order to get my applications to run on my customer's computers I have had to wade through Microsoft's horrid documentation and become an expert on updating Microsoft software. And guess what, no expert at Microsoft can guarantee these updates will not break applications on a user's computer. I stay awake at night in sweats waiting for a call from one of my clients because the system updates I have performed on their computer has broken some older application they have installed and are using. Further a number of my customer's are not connected to the internet or do not have a big enough bandwidth to download the microsoft updates in a timely matter. In order to deal with these contingencies an I have had to develop an installer that contains all the necessary Microsoft update files.
Shame on Microsoft. I should not have to carry the burden of updating a user's computer in order that the DotNet FrameWork can be used. If the minds in Seattle are too scared to develop an executable to update a System for the DotNet framework why should us developers bother.
Sincerely
Jim McPhee
