Sirsha.com

Do you know of a way to get the new version to run on v 1.0 of .Net? Where I work we are standardized on 1.0, installing 1.1 actually breaks our security model (perhaps bad design on that app, but then again I didn't design it ;-) ). Which brings me to another question: why don't folks who release desktop apps compile for all versions of the framework? it's really not that dificult. At least when you have the source for a project there are utilities out there for changing the .resx, .*proj, and .sln files so they will open in VS.NET under different versions and compile to the version of choice.

until then, I am stuck using less than stellar .9.2.1 which has awful memory performance.

just my .02
jayson

you shouldn't be using SharpReader while you're at work anyway, right?

I think the reason why people don't still do dual compiles is because there is little reason for it. Very few people find themselves in your situation. I don't even have the 1.0 framework installed here. The benefits of having two branches of the code and compiling and testing both doesn't justify the work. And you also seem to be assuming that the app will work on v1.0 but your security model is an example that this is not always the case.

I would say that v1.0 was little more than the public beta release that most MS 1.0 releases are. The sooner we drop it completely, the better.

*plays devils advocate*

that is equivalent to targeting one version of windows (which is/was the platform before .Net). I am not a desktop developer (I am a web dev, therefor the browser is my platform, and if we're worth our weight in HTML we test for browser type/version), but I would think that only targeting one version of a platform (be it .Net, or Win32) would effectively cut yourself off from a potential installed customer base. regardless, I may have worded it wrong in my initial comment. it would be quite easy for those folks to put conditional compilation statements in their app, test for the appropriate version in the installer, and the appropriate code is deployed accordingly. I personally think it's a poor design choice on the part of the sharpreader devs...but hey, it's free software so you get what you pay for right ;-)? also, I have yet to run a windows app written for 1.1 that loses any functionality on 1.0 (MS promised nothing would break, but we know how MS is on their promises). conditional compilation would have been the way to go.

cheerio

you're assuming things again. You run v1.0 instead of v1.1 at work because there *were* breaking changes. MS *never* "promised nothing would break". There were documented breaking changes before the upgrade was released.

But regardless of whether a conditional compile would be "quite easy", the benefit vs. effort payoff isn't there. Version 1.0 of the framework is dead, your employer should have replaced it long ago. The fact that they haven't isn't really a big deal, but it is annoying when people using v1.0 of the framework, Win98, NT4.0, or a 2002 calendar complain that the world has moved on and forgotten them.