.NET Framework 3.0

When speaking to developers about WinFX one question that repeatedly comes up is, “WinFX sounds great, but what happens to .NET?” .NET Framework has becomes the most successful developer platform in the world. Developers know and love .NET.

The .NET Framework has always been at the core of WinFX, but the WinFX brand didn’t convey this. The WinFX brand helped us introduce the incredible innovations in terms of Windows Presentation Foundation (WPF), Windows Communication Foundation (WCF), Windows Workflow Foundation (WF) and the newly christened Windows CardSpace (WCS) formerly known under the codename “InfoCard.” The brand also created an unnatural discontinuity between previous versions of our framework and the current version.

With this in mind we have decided to rename WinFX to the .NET Framework 3.0. .NET Framework 3.0 aptly identifies the technology for exactly what it is – the next version of our developer framework.

The change is in name only and will not affect the technologies being delivered as part of the product. The .NET Framework 3.0 is still comprised of the existing .NET Framework 2.0 components, including ASP.NET, WinForms, ADO.NET, additional base class libraries and the CLR, as well as new developer-focused innovative technologies in WPF, WCF, WF and WCS:

The .NET Framework 3.0 will still ship with Windows Vista, and will be available down-level for Windows XP and Windows Server 2003 as planned. This change doesn’t affect in any way the ship schedules of either Windows Vista or the .NET Framework 3.0 itself.

We are confident that this change will go a long way towards reducing confusion people may have about our developer platform and the technologies in which they should invest. 

Namaste!

Comments

• Anonymous
  June 09, 2006
  But the CLR is still v2.0, right? Right? :)

• Anonymous
  June 09, 2006
  I hope FX3.0 will be installed by single installer and resist in the same directory (WindowsMicrosoft.NETFrameworkv3.0...

• Anonymous
  June 09, 2006
  Soma Somasegar vient d'annoncer sur son blog la nouvelle: Microsoft vient de décider de renommer WinFX...

• Anonymous
  June 09, 2006
  Yes - The CLR is still v2.0.  
  
  - somasegar

• Anonymous
  June 09, 2006
  The cat's out of the bag on the WinFX name change.  That's right, it's now the .NET Framework 3.0. ...

• Anonymous
  June 09, 2006
  Also, "InfoCard" becomes "Windows CardSpaces (WCS)"
  A couple days ahead of TechEd 2006, Microsoft's...

• Anonymous
  June 09, 2006
  Endnu engang har vi fået en omdøbning af de kommende teknologier – det er næsten ikke til at følge...

• Anonymous
  June 09, 2006
  Mmm, now that everybody is used to the (pretty cool) WinFX name, we have to learn to say the .NET Framework...

• Anonymous
  June 09, 2006
  Also, "InfoCard" becomes "Windows CardSpaces (WCS)"
  A couple days ahead of TechEd 2006, Microsoft's...

• Anonymous
  June 09, 2006
  I was sentimentally attached to the name "Infocard", as I was to "Indigo" and "Avalon"... but I've to...

• Anonymous
  June 09, 2006
  So, WinFX, err .NET 3.0 will also include C# 3.0 (Linq, etc), any CLR changes planned?
  
  Will the next VS be built for/on .NET 3.0? (like now VS 2005 is built for .net 2.0)
  
  Windows Presentation Foundation was so much fun to use :)

• Anonymous
  June 09, 2006
  The comment has been removed

• Anonymous
  June 09, 2006
  My Question is the same as above! is XLINQ going to be part of the .Net Framework 3.0?

• Anonymous
  June 09, 2006
  What about Visual Studio "Orcas" ?
  
  Will it be available with the .net framework 3.0, so in the end of 2006 ?
  

• Anonymous
  June 09, 2006
  WinFX -> .NET 3.0: Microsoft name change, in advance of any shipment: "With this in mind we have decided to rename WinFX to the .NET Framework 3.0." "InfoCard" branding also becomes "Windows CardSpace (WCS)". Doug Mahugh

• Anonymous
  June 09, 2006
  Microsoft has decided to rename WinFX to the .NET Framework 3.0.  See Soma’s blog for details....

• Anonymous
  June 09, 2006
  I am also very interested whether C# 3.0 will replace C# 2.0 in .NET Framewotk 3.0?

• Anonymous
  June 09, 2006
  Microsoft has renamed WinFX to the .NET Framework 3.0
  .NET Framework 3.0 aptly identifies the technology...

• Anonymous
  June 09, 2006
  It's official:
  
  "InfoCard" has a REAL name - Windows CardSpace™.
  WinFX is being renamed to .NET Framework...

• Anonymous
  June 09, 2006
  You've got to be kidding me.
  The .NET Framework has always been at the core of WinFX, but the WinFX...

• Anonymous
  June 09, 2006
  PingBack from http://www.hatim.net/2006/06/09/net-framework-30/

• Anonymous
  June 09, 2006
  The comment has been removed

• Anonymous
  June 09, 2006
  The comment has been removed

• Anonymous
  June 09, 2006
  Somasegar, Corporate Vice President of Microsof's Developer Division, has announced that the WinFX brand...

• Anonymous
  June 09, 2006
  The comment has been removed

• Anonymous
  June 09, 2006
  Is this the final nail in the coffin of having WinFX, er .NET 3.0, become the "preferred" API for future versions of Windows (or at least Vista)?  It seems so to me.  :-(  So the .NET Framework remains a "developer platform" that is distinctly separate from the OS API.  What's the deal here?  When we switched from Win16 to Win32 everybody knew that the new API was coming.  With .NET it is ambiguous.  Is .NET quitely becoming the successor to Win32 over time?  Or is .NET just another development platform like Java or MFC which just "sits" on the OS API?  I think this is a question that Microsoft needs to answer because the story put forth at PDC 2003 seems to have changed quite a bit.

• Anonymous
  June 09, 2006
  The comment has been removed

• Anonymous
  June 09, 2006
  The comment has been removed

• Anonymous
  June 09, 2006
  The word is out, Soma has announced on his blog that WinFX will officially be badged as .NET 3.0. ...

• Anonymous
  June 09, 2006
  Hoy, mientras Ecuador le ganaba a Polonia en el Mundial de Fútbol (¡sí se puede!), Somasegar anunció...

• Anonymous
  June 09, 2006
  a

• Anonymous
  June 09, 2006
  This seems quite silly - so the .NET Framework 3.0 will contain the .NET Framework 2.0?

• Anonymous
  June 09, 2006
  Paul Krill at InfoWorld:
  Microsoft has re-branded its WinFX technologies as .Net Framework 3.0 to clarify the naming convention for its developer framework, company representatives said on Friday.
  .Net Framework 3.0 is planned for inclusion in Windo..

• Anonymous
  June 09, 2006
  Acorde con el articulo Web 2.0, Meet .Net 3.0 y con el post de Somasegar's Blog WinFX ahora se llamara...

• Anonymous
  June 09, 2006
  Soma announced today that WinFX is being renamed to .NET Framework 3.0 to help out with developer confusion. ...

• Anonymous
  June 09, 2006
  Whatever it is I want some. Fast. Before you change another name.
  Okay, awhile ago MS introduced...

• Anonymous
  June 09, 2006
  I posted some more detailed answers to common questions here: http://blogs.msdn.com/jasonz/archive/2006/06/09/624629.aspx
  
  Quick answers:
  1.  .NET FX 3.0 is based on .NET FX 2.0 and will therefore use the 2.0 compilers.
  
  2.  LINQ is an Orcas feature which means it is after .NET FX 3.0.
  
  3.  After we finish updating the build to match the naming changes, .NET FX 3.0 will be installed into the %windir%Microsoft.NETFrameworkV3.0.
  
  Jason

• Anonymous
  June 09, 2006
  PingBack from http://et.cairene.net/2006/06/09/winfx-becomes-net-30/

• Anonymous
  June 09, 2006
  The comment has been removed

• Anonymous
  June 09, 2006
  PingBack from https://blogs.msdn.com:443/seshadripv/archive/2006/06/10/624657.aspx

• Anonymous
  June 09, 2006
  Ante la pregunta y confusión sobre si WinFX remplazará al .NET Framework, cuando de hecho WinFX es "WinAPI...

• Anonymous
  June 09, 2006
  PingBack from http://tentimesbetter.com/2006/06/09/dotnet-30-is-coming-oh-wait-its-not/

• Anonymous
  June 09, 2006
  PingBack from http://www.identityblog.com/?p=469

• Anonymous
  June 09, 2006
  http://blogs.msdn.com/somasegar/archive/2006/06/09/624300.aspx
  In my opinion, this ROCKS. Though I have...

• Anonymous
  June 09, 2006
  C Omega (next after C#) what's gonna happen to it? CLR 3.0 -> .NET Framework 4.0?
  
  I do not think they idea for this change in name signifies logic.

• Anonymous
  June 09, 2006
  Soma (S. Somasegar: Corporate Vice President, Developer Division) announced today that WinFx will...

• Anonymous
  June 09, 2006
  PingBack from http://spaces.msn.com/velveren/blog/cns!2BF8A5A3C5EDBBBA!663.entry

• Anonymous
  June 09, 2006
  Honestly, this is really dumb, and judging from some of the initial comments, is actually contributing to the confusion about .NET 3.0.  
  
  I liked WinFX.  It had a nice futuristic feel to it, especially if you were coming from the world of Win32, Win16, etc...
  
  What was wrong with .NET 2.0 FX? You could of kept .NET 2.0, and used the "FX" marketing to include all of these technologies being bundled together.  Going from 2.0 to 3.0 implies a rather LARGE feature set increase and that's really not true.  But hey, whatever, you guys do whatever you want to do.   You're Microsoft after all.  Just expect more confusion than not.
  

• Anonymous
  June 09, 2006
  The comment has been removed

• Anonymous
  June 09, 2006
  I have to agree that while those who haven't ever coded in .NET would be confused over the WinFX, this name change also implies a whole lot of subtle strategy changes whether you wanted it to or not. That's what will make it really confusing for the rest of us.

• Anonymous
  June 09, 2006
  Today we announced the rebranding of WinFX to the .NET Framework 3.0
  See Soma's blog for the full story...but...

• Anonymous
  June 09, 2006
  WinFx has been renamed to .NET 3.0. I think this is one of the smartest moves from the branding team...

• Anonymous
  June 09, 2006
  Tja, kein Scherz so schnell kann es gehen. Jedoch ist es nur WinFX und das .NET 2.0 Framework welches zusammengeführt und umbenannt wird, es nennt sich nun .NET 3.0 [1].
  
  Obwohl es .NET 3.0 heisst basiert WinFX weiterhin auf dem .NET Framework

• Anonymous
  June 09, 2006
  When I first read “.NET 3.0”  I thought “April Fools? Did I miss the planning?” –...

• Anonymous
  June 09, 2006
  PingBack from http://www.msblog.org/?p=769

• Anonymous
  June 09, 2006
  Disgusting! Why didn't you rename it WinFX for .NET?

• Anonymous
  June 09, 2006
  The comment has been removed

• Anonymous
  June 09, 2006
  The comment has been removed

• Anonymous
  June 09, 2006
  Reading through the comments I have to agree. Tacking "Windows"' onto the names like "Windows CardSpaces" is a perfect setup for failure.

• Anonymous
  June 09, 2006
  Ho da poco acceso il PC, aperto il mio Outlook 2007 e cosa ti vedo? Questo post scritto niente popo di...

• Anonymous
  June 09, 2006
  when Will .Net Framework 3.0 have a ClickOnce installer available ? will there be an IE6 plugin for WPF before WPF/E ?

• Anonymous
  June 09, 2006
  Ever wanted to contribute to MSDN documentation? Visit MSDN Wiki and submit your content. RSS feeds are...

• Anonymous
  June 09, 2006
  Rebranding it to .NET Framework v3.0 will make things a lot more confusing.:
  
  .NET 2.0 = ADO.NET 2.0, ASP.NET 2.0, CLR 2.0, C# 2.0
  .NET 3.0 = ADO.NET 2.0, ASP.NET 2.0, CLR 2.0, C# 2.0, WPF, WCF ... (?)
  .NET 4.0=  ADO.NET 3.0, ASP.NET 3.0, CLR 2.0, C# 2.0, WPF, WCF ... (?)
  
  Better would be:
  .NET 2.5: ADO.NET 2.0, CLR 2.0, C# 2.0, WPF, WCF ...

• Anonymous
  June 09, 2006
  I assume this also means schema uri changes?

• Anonymous
  June 09, 2006
  The comment has been removed

• Anonymous
  June 09, 2006
  Trackback from dotnetkicks.com

• Anonymous
  June 09, 2006
  "We are confident that this change will go a long way towards reducing confusion people may have about our developer platform"
  
  Reducing!?
  Marketing ruins the day again!
  

• Anonymous
  June 09, 2006
  The comment has been removed

• Anonymous
  June 10, 2006
  
  Somasegar's WebLog : .NET Framework 3.0.
  This will stir up lots of conversations about how marketing...

• Anonymous
  June 10, 2006
  PingBack from http://www.cengizhan.com/PermaLink.aspx?guid=cfc02041-fd36-42fe-8855-ba8ae9112e96

• Anonymous
  June 10, 2006
  Hey, I don't appreciate nor like renames very much - but indeed, it should have been named the .NET Framework 3.0 from the very beginning!!! Okay, purhaps not the third version if the run-time is going to be the same, just an extension to the set of framwork classes. But anyway, maybe this should just be looked upon as Microsoft taking self-criticism seriously. If similar technologies could be fewer and rather combined into a single non-profiled product it got to make things easier for everybody.

• Anonymous
  June 10, 2006
  Let's get to the practical questions of this change:
  
  Will the 2.0 assemblies (like System.dll) included in 3.0 have a version change, or will it be the same version?
  
  Either way, how does this affect side-by-side installations of .net?  That is, can I have 1.1, 2.0 and 3.0 installed?  Or does 3.0 actually update 2.0?  Will we need to change runtime bindings in our manifests?
  
  Will .net 2.0 continue to be supported via service packs, or is 3.0 going to effectively end-of-life 2.0?
  
  will we get a .net 3.0 sdk that includes "the sdk formerly known as winFx" ,  instead of having to install the mammoth vista win sdk to develop apps?
  
  Thanks!

• Anonymous
  June 10, 2006
  Winfx renamed to DotNet Framework 3.0

• Anonymous
  June 10, 2006
  I'm concerned about the same things as Phillip.  Versioning is going to be a nightmare!
  
  If Microsoft really wants to lump this all into .NET Framework 3.0, then they need to do a full version upgrade of EVERYTHING.  All of the languages should be versioned 3.0.  The compiler and the framework itself should be 3.0.  The WinFx functionality should be an integral part of the Framework (i.e. proper namespacing in respect to other Framework objects).  Etc...  Etc...  Tacking extra functionality onto 2.0 and calling it 3.0 leaves developers floundering when it comes to version detection.
  
  We've only started converting old 1.1 applications to 2.0 in the past couple of months.  We will be supporting 1.1 applications for years to come.  Now we're going to have yet another version change?  Side-by-side installation had BETTER be supported with 2.0 and 3.0 or we simply won't bother.
  
  

• Anonymous
  June 10, 2006
  I thought Java 2 SDK 1.5 was confusing - .NET 3.0 framework 2.0 is just as ridiculous!

• Anonymous
  June 10, 2006
  The comment has been removed

• Anonymous
  June 10, 2006
  The comment has been removed

• Anonymous
  June 10, 2006
  Mighell l’ha già annunciato qui. A quanto pare WinFX diventerà .NET Framework 3.0. E’ sicuramente una...

• Anonymous
  June 10, 2006
  PingBack from http://scobleizer.wordpress.com/2006/06/10/chris-pirillo-doesnt-get-second-life-and-gives-us-windows-vista-stats/

• Anonymous
  June 10, 2006
  If your day job exists around using these frameworks, could explain your day job to your mother?
  
  "So what are you working on?"
  
  "Computers..."

• Anonymous
  June 10, 2006
  This is a terrible idea, just for the incongruity between the CLR version and the product version.  Was -nothing- learned from the whole "just name everything .NET" debacle several years back?

• Anonymous
  June 10, 2006
  The comment has been removed

• Anonymous
  June 10, 2006
  Po pierwsze właśnie ściągam film z prezentacją LinQ, z której mam nadzieje się dowiedzieć więcej o Entities....

• Anonymous
  June 10, 2006
  It is a great idea!
  
  Today we have tons of code running either under 1.1 or 2.0, and upgrading some of the code from 1.1 to 2.0 was painful, this is why the code runs side by side.
  
  Having 3.0 as a separate .NET platform is the right thing to do, we can then easily have parts of the application running in 3.0 (for the new features) without braking the entire application that runs under 2.0 and 1.1
  

• Anonymous
  June 10, 2006
  Makes a lot of sense to me and the reasoning behind this is a theme we’ve been trying to stress at the...

• Anonymous
  June 10, 2006
  It makes perfect sense... The CLR is solid and does not require much in terms of core development anymore, so lets start calling the extended libraries the .NET Framework as well.
  
  That was a very wise move!!!
  
  Namaste

• Anonymous
  June 10, 2006
  Eu passei os últimos meses estudando e falando de WinFX pelo Brasil afora (São Paulo, Belém do Pará,...

• Anonymous
  June 10, 2006
  The comment has been removed

• Anonymous
  June 10, 2006
  The comment has been removed

• Anonymous
  June 10, 2006
  Take a look at this very recent excerpt and follow the link to Soma Somasegar's blog to learn more about...

• Anonymous
  June 10, 2006
  Man, I hope this is a late April Fool's joke.

• Anonymous
  June 10, 2006
  PingBack from http://www.khuboz.com/?p=21

• Anonymous
  June 10, 2006
  The comment has been removed

• Anonymous
  June 10, 2006
  I just noticed a blog post made yesterday by S. Somasegar (the vice president in charge of developer...

• Anonymous
  June 10, 2006
  This is just a bad idea. WinFX is a solid name. It sounds polished. .NET was a stepping stone to get us to what WinFX is. Sure its the next version but its so complete. Should have stuck with WinFX.

• Anonymous
  June 10, 2006
  <a href="http://www.pkblogs.com/coredotnet/2006/06/net-2-fast-3-furious.html">2 Fast, 3 Furious</a>

• Anonymous
  June 10, 2006
  The comment has been removed

• Anonymous
  June 10, 2006
  WinFX has been renamed to .NET Framework 3.0!
  .NET Framework 3.0 includes
  
  Windows Presentation Foundation...

• Anonymous
  June 10, 2006
  While many of you haven't yet migrated to .NET Framework 2.0 due to the corporate policy or other reasons...

• Anonymous
  June 10, 2006
  The comment has been removed

• Anonymous
  June 10, 2006
  PingBack from http://blogs.msdn.com/brada/archive/2006/06/10/625717.aspx

• Anonymous
  June 10, 2006
  PingBack from http://blog.pointlogic.com/2006/06/10/winfx-heet-voortaan-net-framework-30/

• Anonymous
  June 10, 2006
  PingBack from http://blergh.wordpress.com/2006/06/11/links-for-2006-06-10/

• Anonymous
  June 10, 2006
  Did you ever thight of having a poll when making such deceisions?
  Do you mind developers' opinions?

• Anonymous
  June 10, 2006
  The comment has been removed

• Anonymous
  June 10, 2006
  The comment has been removed

• Anonymous
  June 10, 2006
  The comment has been removed

• Anonymous
  June 10, 2006
  After a twelve hour journey - from Brussels over London - I arrived in Boston where I will be attending...

• Anonymous
  June 10, 2006
  Se serviva la parola &quot;fine&quot; all'ambizione di avere con Longhon un sistema operativo basato su una nuova...

• Anonymous
  June 10, 2006
  Thank you nas! It makes perfect sense for 3.0 to be a new release. A whole bunch of new code to play with in the framework? 3.0! Who ever said that the CLR, C#, etc, etc had to follow the framework version?
  
  I too, am ashamed to be lumped in with the rest of the commentors crying over a version change. This shouldn't break your 2.0 apps - life will go on. Is it really THAT hard to remember the difference between 1.1, 2.0, 3.0 etc?

• Anonymous
  June 10, 2006
  In a fairly quiet announcement, made on a blog (noteworthy all by itself!), Microsoft has decided to...

• Anonymous
  June 10, 2006
  The comment has been removed

• Anonymous
  June 10, 2006
  Those are welcome news. I don't want to say I told you, but I remember I suggested John Montgomery to stick to the .NET branding in a comment to his blog, back in November 2003. That was just after the PDC in which all these new technologies were announced.
  
  The general consensus by then was that the.NET branding had been completely eroded by the various marketing mistakes Microsoft made (like adding the .NET moniker to products that did not carry the CLR).
  
  But I told him that we developers were not that much confused and that we always got the story right.
  
  It is nice to see that once more Microsoft does as I want ;)
  

• Anonymous
  June 10, 2006
  It makes complete sense. Read more.

• Anonymous
  June 10, 2006
  Somasegar's WebLog : .NET Framework 3.0 ...

• Anonymous
  June 10, 2006
  Wouldn't it be better if it was called .NET Framework 2.x (say 2.5) to highlight its reliance on CLR 2.0? This way you could use 3.0 for C# 3.0, LINQ and other new features...
  
  Also do you have any plans about baking Atlas into this new version of the framework?

• Anonymous
  June 10, 2006
  Lets stick together .Net Framework 2.0, Team Foundation Server, Excel and OneCare and call this set of "innovative" technologies .Net Framework 4.0.
  I's simple, because it'll have single installer.
  People are confused, because they don't know what OneCare means, but now they have famimiliar .Net Framework 4.0 to deal with. Green light to safe developement.
  

• Anonymous
  June 10, 2006
  It looks like WinForms are just there for compatibility in .NET 3.0.
  
  Hope you didn't spend too long learning them

• Anonymous
  June 10, 2006
  http://blogs.msdn.com/somasegar/archive/2006/06/09/624300.aspx
  どうやらWinFX（←コードネーム）の正式な名前は「.NET Framework...

• Anonymous
  June 10, 2006
  What about community sites that already are using WinFX? Sites such as http://www.roadtowinfx.com, http://www.winfxguide.com, http://www.winfx247.com, http://www.winfxitalia.com, just to name a few? Can you imagine a name such as http://www.dotnetframeworkthree247.com? And WinFx was a cute name :)

• Anonymous
  June 10, 2006
  The comment has been removed

• Anonymous
  June 10, 2006
  PingBack from http://cowpowered.com/blog/2006/06/11/goodbye-winfx/

• Anonymous
  June 11, 2006
  Whatever we post here, the thing is done, and even Wikipedia has already reacted to the changes http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WinFX. But why don't you guys conduct some poll to research if consumers of your great products DO want these changes? Why simply "we have decided" - should we just silently accept all of your decisions?

• Anonymous
  June 11, 2006
  First thought is: &quot;Wow, I haven't yet get really started with v2.0, and now they bring 3.0.&quot; :-) Well,...

• Anonymous
  June 11, 2006
  che confusione!

• Anonymous
  June 11, 2006
  A picture is worth a 1,000 words.  Thanks!

• Anonymous
  June 11, 2006
  Okay, .Net 1.0 - .Net 1.1 - .NET 2.0 -.Net 3.0
  When will .Net 4.x released?
  
  will .Net3 realy be more understandable this time ?
  
  And what about C++ .Net, what are the changes now?
  __gc, ^ or will it be * ?
  
  Why another framework?

• Anonymous
  June 11, 2006
  I think the main goal of M$ is to keep the devs busy with trying to understand their stuff so that there's absolutely no time for them to try out other and better frameworks like Qt or Java (to some degree)
  

• Anonymous
  June 11, 2006
  http://blogs.msdn.com/somasegar/archive/2006/06/09/624300.aspx
  WinFX라는 이름이 .NET이 없어지는 것처럼 보였던 이미지 때문에...

• Anonymous
  June 11, 2006
  Vineri am anunţat că vom utiliza numele de .Net Framework 3.0 pentru tot ce-a &#238;nsemnat p&#226;nă acum .Net...

• Anonymous
  June 11, 2006
  Aufgrund der allgemeinen Frage &quot;Was wird aus .NET, alle reden von WinFX&quot; ist mit fast 100%iger Sicherheit...

• Anonymous
  June 11, 2006
  Good.
  With Windows Communication Foundation (WCF), formerly code-named Indigo having its own implementation to provide the latest and greatest in Web Services standard. It was darn confusing whether we need to use the web services framework in .net 2.0 or use WCF for future compatibility with the next gen framework.
  
  Now we are guaranteed that WCF will keep up with compiler changes in the .net framework.
  
  There is a similar issue with SQLXML classes hope that get integrated with the .net framework too.

• Anonymous
  June 11, 2006
  This gonna make new developers of .NET to missunderstand what is going on. A realy good idea is to name WinFX .NET 2.5... Make poll on that on the www.microsoft.com is good idea.
  
  Regards

• Anonymous
  June 11, 2006
  There is some confusion about the recent announcement on .NET Framework 3.0.&amp;nbsp; Let's try to clear...

• Anonymous
  June 11, 2006
  PingBack from http://christianotto.wordpress.com/2006/06/11/winfx-will-be-named-net-30/

• Anonymous
  June 11, 2006
  "Let's try to clear... "
  He he...  This is the source of the confusion.
  

• Anonymous
  June 11, 2006
  PingBack from http://www.canerten.com/net-framework-30/

• Anonymous
  June 11, 2006
  El vicepresidente Somasegar, ha anunciado recientemente algunas de las gu&#237;as a seguir en lo que se refiere...

• Anonymous
  June 11, 2006
  ".NET Framework has becomes the most successful developer platform in the world."
  
  How do you define 'successful' and on which numbers is this assumption based?
  
  Isn't the low adaption of .NET the true reason for the renaming?
  
  I think it is pretty clear to everyone that you just had to put the .NET label on an other product.
  

• Anonymous
  June 11, 2006
  I agree with comments above that it isn't disaster calling new package of new toys .NET framework x.x instead of WinFX, but the versioning should be 2.5!
  
  It would indicate CRL 2.0 / compilers from 2.0 or C# 2.0. It is only logicall that features (like WPF) from 2.5 wouldn't be avaiable in 2.0. We had this scenario with 1.1, which already had features that 1.0 missed!
  
  It this new MARKETING (boom! on this word) renaming for Vista to look cool, we will have C#3.0 with LINQ etc, which won't work in .NET 3.0 but in .NET 3.5 which is more messy (0.5 should indicate only some feature addons not language/compilers change!). Solution is to rename it to C# 4.0 and skip some version number like in DirectX history.
  
  AH!

• Anonymous
  June 11, 2006
  The reason I don't like the change:
  I'd like WPF, WCF etc become part of .Net Framework. But I don't like the fact that original class libraries  and compilers are "betrayed".
  It would be good to ADD WPF etc to .Net Framework 3.0.
  But you're just bundling WPF with .Net Framework 2.0 and calling that 3.0. That doesn't make sense.

• Anonymous
  June 11, 2006
  Will you say after a year:
  "  .NET FX 4.0 is based on .NET FX 3.0 and will therefore use the 3.0 compilers which are 2.0 compilers." ?

• Anonymous
  June 11, 2006
  PingBack from http://www.hatvany-online.net/wordpress/?p=24

• Anonymous
  June 11, 2006
  Go off the grid to enjoy a weekend of blue skys and 30c and this little number roles in (oh and the scoble...

• Anonymous
  June 11, 2006
  The comment has been removed

• Anonymous
  June 11, 2006
  Why? Simple - WinFX is being renamed .NET Framework 3.0 :-) IMVHO this is an overdue rename and very...

• Anonymous
  June 11, 2006
  PingBack from http://www.cduv.org/2006/06/11/noticias-interesantes-de-la-semana/

• Anonymous
  June 11, 2006
  I ran across an amusing bit of news today that seems to be receiving mixed reactions among the .NET developer community. Yes, the .NET Framework 3.0 is upon us...

• Anonymous
  June 11, 2006
  What I'd really like to know is when Visual Studio For .NET 3.0 will be released???
  How's that for being confused.

• Anonymous
  June 11, 2006
  Li no blog do Alfred que a Microsoft decidiu rebatizar o WinFX, nova API do Windows, para .NET Framework...

• Anonymous
  June 11, 2006
  I'm a little slow on this one due to having a life on the weekend (well, a life without work anyway),...

• Anonymous
  June 11, 2006
  PingBack from http://blog.initech.com/planning/?p=49

• Anonymous
  June 11, 2006
  Oren - Not sure if your comments were aimed more at .NET or InfoCard, but since you explicitly name the latter, I guess your concerns are around the interoperability of CardSpace (formerly "InfoCard").
  
  Nothing has changed here. CardSpace is just InfoCard with a "real" name. All that you've (clearly) come to understand about this technology remains true.
  
  CardSafe is Microsoft's implementation of the core user experience of the Identity Metasystem. CardSafe communicates between identity providers and relying parties using open standard protocols in order to provide an open, inclusive environment in which identity and other forms of personal information can be securely exchanged.
  
  Hope this clears up your concerns on this front.

• Anonymous
  June 11, 2006
  PingBack from http://nacho.com.ar/2006/06/en-pocas-lineas-12/

• Anonymous
  June 11, 2006
  Asa cum spunea si Todi, numele de marketing al noului framework va fi .NET Framework 3.0. Chiar daca...

• Anonymous
  June 11, 2006
  Picked this up from Soma's blog:
  
  ...we have decided to rename WinFX to the .NET Framework 3.0.&amp;nbsp;...

• Anonymous
  June 11, 2006
  PingBack from http://thejoshblog.wordpress.com/2006/06/12/joshback/

• Anonymous
  June 11, 2006
  hehe :) M$ can't catch up their own technologies. :)) It's dangerous game, dudes! Once in future people will throw away your _ucking "new" API and go to Linux.

• Anonymous
  June 11, 2006
  What's frightening about a .NET 3.0 version instead of a major upgrade of .NET 2.0 to some 2.1 like 1.1 was to 1.0, is that developers would have to obtain Visual Studio Orcas/2007 in order to compile assemblies that target version 3.0 without having to go to Notepad... It's already spoken that VS2005 is one way to go to develop for Windows Vista, but a major version change indicates that a new version of VS is needed to develop for it.
  Still, I agree that it the correct name most likely IS .NET Framework "some version above 2.0", but also that it makes it hard for developers who are currently targeting something named WinFX.
  So yes, it is wrong to rename products, because it is confusing, and a lot more reasons, but this time it has been changed towards what should always have been.

• Anonymous
  June 11, 2006
  "What I'd really like to know is when Visual Studio For .NET 3.0 will be released???
  How's that for being confused."
  
  Visual Studio 2005 will work great with .NET Framework 3.0.
  

• Anonymous
  June 11, 2006
  I do think, calling is .NET 2.x is better than .NET 3.0
  
  

• Anonymous
  June 11, 2006
  The comment has been removed

• Anonymous
  June 11, 2006
  Gah, a chance to rename it, and MS stick with .Net? Has noone mentioned what a nightmare it is searching the internet for that? I'm fed up with pages with domainname.net being returned adding to the noise already created with splogs.
  
  And CardSafe isn't a very good name imo either. We're in the 21st Century, I think its safe to drop the metaphors of ye olde worlde without confusing us mere mortals.

• Anonymous
  June 11, 2006
  What about the cost of having to reprint all .NET v2 books, as no one will buy a V2 book once V3 is shipping...
  
  Likewise with all the MCP exams, all the V2 .NET exams have just had there values reduced by this name change.

• Anonymous
  June 11, 2006
  &amp;nbsp;&quot;You can think of WinFX like .NET 3.0,&quot; I often said, while explaining how these new technologies...

• Anonymous
  June 11, 2006
  Kea - No, you won't need a whole new version of Visual Studio to compile .NET FX 3.0 applications - just as you don't need a new version of Visual Studio 2005 to compile WinFX apps today. This is just a packaging and naming consolidation, not a major upheaval.
  
  And to the points raised in the comments on this blog – everything you know about .NET FX 2.0 will still apply in .NET FX 3.0 – this is why we’re not planning any major updates to .NET FX 2.0 – it’s a great platform with awesome capabilities.
  
  Most of the “changes” in .NET FX 3.0 are additive – the inclusion of Windows Communications, Presentation and Workflow Foundation, and CardSpace.
  
  Regarding why we didn’t call this .NET FX 2.1/2.5/whatever is that the additional technologies included in .NET FX 3.0 are a significant addition above and beyond the existing shipping .NET FX 2.0. When we shipped .NET FX 1.1, there were some fundamental changes to the classes included in .NET FX 1.0 – this isn’t the case with .NET FX 3.0 – hence the specific choice of .NET Framework 3.0.
  
  This naming change may, at first glance appear a little confusing but we strongly believe that consolidating all our managed developer technologies into one long-term platform will offer greater simplicity and consistency than introducing (yet) another developer technology branding of WinFX.
  
  

• Anonymous
  June 11, 2006
  Comments including this one: http://blogs.msdn.com/somasegar/archive/2006/06/09/624300.aspx#625064 regarding the "Tacking of Windows onto products such as CardSafe":
  
  This is necessary. In order for Microsoft to protect its implementation of the user experience of the Identity Metasystem. Just as it will be necessary for IBM, Sun, Apple, (name your) Linux distro, etc., to protect their implementation of a similar feature.
  
  This formal naming of the Windows feature (as mentioned earlier) in no way impacts or changes Microsoft's commitment to and support of the necessary WS-* protocols to enable CardSpace to interoperate with other technologies and platforms.

• Anonymous
  June 11, 2006
  PingBack from http://www.garyshort.org/?p=253

• Anonymous
  June 11, 2006
  The most talked about platform - the Winfx that encompassed the major breakthroughs including the Communication...

• Anonymous
  June 11, 2006
  Good call. After all, it is the .NET framework itself that has evolved. The best of it is that the CLR will remain V2 for some time, so it is evolving from growth rather than from change. .NET is Good! :-D

• Anonymous
  June 11, 2006
  Microsoft did it again. MS is going to release .Net Framework 2.0 bundled with WinFX under the name .Net...

• Anonymous
  June 12, 2006
  WinFX 3.0 is now .Net Framework 3.0
  With the aim of providing us with consistency Soma has announced...

• Anonymous
  June 12, 2006
  PingBack from http://www.jonloh.com/index.php/2006/06/12/net-framework-30-announced/

• Anonymous
  June 12, 2006
  PingBack from http://blog.markwillems.nl/DetailsView.aspx?PostingID=f838a915-e5ed-49e8-ba80-6a267441ab3f

• Anonymous
  June 12, 2006
  I'm a bit worried. To what extent are you going to bloat out the already huge .NET framework to include WinFX?
  
  Please do NOT forget about those of us trying to build real-world applications on the .NET framework TODAY. We have to distribute the .NET runtimes to customers, and it's already difficult due to the massive size.
  
  Please just keep this in mind.
  

• Anonymous
  June 12, 2006
  While attending Microsoft TechEd 2006 in Boston, I became aware of a blog posting that was posted on...

• Anonymous
  June 12, 2006
  I've always assumed &quot;WinFx&quot; was just a codename for the new&amp;nbsp;developer technologies coming in the...

• Anonymous
  June 12, 2006
  Good Move..
  
    Finally Its nice to hear this news. Many of my friends used to ask about WinFx...But I used to say its a superset of .NET 2.0 and going to be the future languages etc.....But now it would be easy for anyone to recognize and understand the new technology with ".NET Framework 3.0"- - Really great timing move..Keep going
  Mahesh
  

• Anonymous
  June 12, 2006
  PingBack from http://weblogs.com.pk/nasir/archive/2006/06/12/4228.aspx

• Anonymous
  June 12, 2006
  This is all over the Microsoft blogs: so if you're following them you've no doubt already seen this (more...

• Anonymous
  June 12, 2006
  This name change is only going to ADD confusion. You've been telling us for a long time now that 3.0 is "Orcas" and now it's CLR 2.0, C# 2.0, ASP.NET 2.0, and some new libraries.
  
  If you have to change it from WinFX, at least increment the minor version and not the major version number. You're only making it worse.

• Anonymous
  June 12, 2006
  ".NET Framework has becomes the most successful developer platform in the world."
  
  I must've missed the news when .NET surpassed Java...

• Anonymous
  June 12, 2006
  PingBack from http://www.e-fuze.com/community/?p=475

• Anonymous
  June 12, 2006
  The comment has been removed

• Anonymous
  June 12, 2006
  
  A lot of people are avoiding .net , DRM and staforce protected programs . A big Anti .net push is happening lately
  
  Nlite allows the removal of .net , MS IE , MS OE , MS WMP
  and other things and the intergration of better programs.
  
  It will be good when Nlite supports Vista and people can
  remove from Vista - MS IE , MS OE , MS WMP , dot net,
  turn off a load of services, remove unwanted bloat .

• Anonymous
  June 12, 2006
  On Friday, Microsoft announced the name change of WinFX to &quot;.NET Framework 3.0&quot; and also changed the

• Anonymous
  June 12, 2006
  I'm with the crowd that thinks this is a Bad Thing®.
  
  What was the big problem with leaving it separate from the core framework, like the Enterprise Libraries, until the CORE of the framework moved up to version 3 (at which time it would have made sense to roll WinFX into the framework.)
  
  When it comes down to it, when most developers think of the .Net Framework, they're thinking of the core "System" libraries.  Calling this .Net Framework 3.0 is going to confuse a lot of people (that don't read MS blogs) into thinking there really is a new framework (and a new version of Visual Studio), when there isn't.

• Anonymous
  June 12, 2006
  I rely think MS shouldn't include more than the CLR and BCL in .Net Framework, and especialy anything that is pure windows technology. By doing this they won't be able to release a true new version of .Net Framework without updating all of those satelite technologies wich defeats the very purpose of versioning buit into .Net.
  

• Anonymous
  June 12, 2006
  The comment has been removed

• Anonymous
  June 12, 2006
  As you probably heard by now, WinFX is now .NET Framework 3.0. If you didn’t, check out the announcement...

• Anonymous
  June 12, 2006
   The bad thing is not merging WinFx into .Net. But because of this you delayed improvements to .Net Framework. You cut off C# 3.0 and VB.Net 9.0 , LinQ..... You put in trash compiler enchantments. Delayed the evolution of the platform.
  You betrayed .Net developers.
  
   Isn't it bad? If you release such ".Net 3.0" with Vista, you'll ruin the future of .Net. How may years will pass before you will release C# 3.0 and VB.Net 9.0 ? You'll delay them for years!
  

• Anonymous
  June 12, 2006
  Why making FX2.0+WinFX = FX3.0??? Why??? There is nothing on WinFX that could make it FX3.0. WinFX is built on FX2.0, so why we must take it as FX3.0. Please leave it like it is.  Dont your learn nothing from your last Win16, Win32, Win64 mess??? Please, .NET FX is .NET FX. WinFX is WinFX. .NET FX is a sole entity, WinFX needs .NET FX. Dont mess them.

• Anonymous
  June 12, 2006
  May be .net2.0 Enterprise Edition or a name akin would be sufficient for including Avalon, Indigo etc and would properly communicate the new additions.  Its a sad decision, I cannot imagine .Net 3.0 without C#3.0 and CLR 3.0

• Anonymous
  June 12, 2006
  You guys are missing the point: .NET Framework has always been about shipping a suite of runtime pieces.  Imagine if a user could install pieces separately, like WCF, WPF, etc, instead all together as one set of technologies.  It's much easier for Microsoft to ship everything as .NET Framework 3.0 and support all platforms.  This way you know that if they have ".NET Framework 3.0" on their machine then they have all the associated technologies.  You cannot install WPF separately, that's dead now with the new naming, and that's a good thing.    Forget about what the individual technologies within the version are numbered, i.e. WPF is 1.0, .NET is 2.0.  That's doesn't matter.  The entire suite is .NET 3.0 and it's all or none when you install it.

• Anonymous
  June 12, 2006
  As most of you know already, Soma Somasegar, announced last week that the WinFx has been rechristned...

• Anonymous
  June 12, 2006
  
  The .NET Framework has always been at the core of WinFX, but the WinFX brand didn’t convey this.  The...

• Anonymous
  June 12, 2006
  WinFX turns into .NET 3.0

• Anonymous
  June 12, 2006
  Somasegar, Corporate Vice President of Microsof's Developer Division, has announced that the WinFX brand...

• Anonymous
  June 12, 2006
  I recently attended the RealDevelopment 06 tour here in Vancouver and had the change to listen John Bristowe...

• Anonymous
  June 12, 2006
  The comment has been removed

• Anonymous
  June 12, 2006
  2Mike: you don't get the point. Because of this we won't be able to use next generation of languages and compilers for long time.
  And if they recompile BCL with v 3.0 ..... I guess that will be the end.
  
  They are going to replace .Net Framework 2.0 only after a year....

• Anonymous
  June 12, 2006
  Vista programming model WinFX has been renamed to .NET Framework 3.0. .Net Framework 3.0 consists of...

• Anonymous
  June 12, 2006
  PingBack from http://blog.plaxoed.com/2006/06/12/big-news-for-my-old-team/

• Anonymous
  June 12, 2006
  The comment has been removed

• Anonymous
  June 12, 2006
  Thanks You!!
  This make perfect sense and should have been the direction from the start.  Glad to see it.  Cheers.

• Anonymous
  June 12, 2006
  S. &quot;Soma&quot; Somasegar, corporate vice president of the Developer Division at Microsoft Corporation, announced...

• Anonymous
  June 12, 2006
  <a href='http://www.yahoo.com'></a>Thanks! http://www.insurance-top.com/auto/">http://www.insurance-top.com/auto/ <a href='http://www.insurance-top.com'>auto insurance</a>. <a href="http://www.insurance-top.com ">Insurance car</a>: auto site insurance, car site insurance, The autos insurance company. Also [url]http://www.insurance-top.com/car/[/url] and [link=http://www.insurance-top.com]insurance quote[/link] from site .

• Anonymous
  June 12, 2006
  Thanks!!! http://www.insurance-top.com/company/">http://www.insurance-top.com/company/ car site insurance. [URL=http://www.insurance-top.com]home insurance[/URL]: auto site insurance, car site insurance, The autos insurance company. Also [url=http://www.insurance-top.com]cars insurance[/url] from website .

• Anonymous
  June 12, 2006
  Hi! http://www.insurance-top.com/company/ car site insurance. auto site insurance, car site insurance, The autos insurance company. from website .

• Anonymous
  June 12, 2006
  WinFX will hence be called .NET Framework 3.0. Read more about this at Soma's blog and find answers to...

• Anonymous
  June 12, 2006
  Late last week, Soma posted the news that we're harmonising the naming for .NET and WinFX under one umbrella:...

• Anonymous
  June 12, 2006
  WinFX + .NET 2.0 SHOULD EQUAL .NET 2.X
  
  I understand WinFX + .NET 2.0 EQUALS .NET 3.0, but my management is just not going to understand.

• Anonymous
  June 12, 2006
  A while back, I had an acquaintance of mine at another company make the statement &quot;Microsoft is dropping...

• Anonymous
  June 12, 2006
  .NET Framework 3.0 will ship with Vista.
  
  When speaking to developers about WinFX one question that...

• Anonymous
  June 12, 2006
  PingBack from http://sundaybytes.com/2006/06/13/net-framework-30/

• Anonymous
  June 12, 2006
  The comment has been removed

• Anonymous
  June 12, 2006
  Microsoft has just announced the change of the name of WinFX to .NET 3.0:
  http://blogs.msdn.com/somasegar/archive/2006/06/09/624300.aspx...

• Anonymous
  June 12, 2006
  I notice the trackbacks on this blog are mangled. Maybe a charset detection is needed, and recode (and translit) everything to UTF8.

• Anonymous
  June 12, 2006
  i was just wondering where the standards went on this decision. will they be submitting specification ECMA on implementing WINFX/.Net 3.0? can't it just be called Windows.Net for that matter since this is like the next version of the windows api.

• Anonymous
  June 12, 2006
  Microsoft a officiellement annonc&#233; le changement de nom de WinFX (l'ensemble des API fournies avec Vista),...

• Anonymous
  June 12, 2006
  Microsoft a officiellement annonc&#233; le changement de nom de WinFX (l'ensemble des API fournies avec Vista),...

• Anonymous
  June 12, 2006
  I hope .Net framework (2.0 or 3.0) will be included in  the Windows XP beta3, so that our winForm application can released without another .Net Framework to make it run.

• Anonymous
  June 12, 2006
  Howdy,
  
  I should make it clear from the outset that I am a big supporter of Microsoft and the software you create.
  
  What I find troubling is the fact you continue to create all this stuff... without fixing what you have alreardy released.
  
  I have been working on a VSIDE user control inheritence issue for 2 days now... I also have unanswered defects in the msdn forumns regarding WinFX, Cider and all the rest of it.
  
  Do you think that you are putting enough resources into maintenence of previously released software?
  
  I look forward to the new stuff... but please fix the old stuff first.

• Anonymous
  June 12, 2006
  I just wanted to be counted among those who believed deeply that this should be .NET 2.x and not 3.0, for reasons already mentioned above. Enough said.

• Anonymous
  June 13, 2006
  Thats Great to have 3.0

• Anonymous
  June 13, 2006
  [Via Somesegar]
  ...we have decided to rename WinFX to the .NET Framework 3.0.&amp;nbsp; .NET Framework 3.0...

• Anonymous
  June 13, 2006
  Formerly called WinFX, the official name of the piece of software art is now called .NET Framework 3.0....

• Anonymous
  June 13, 2006
  MS naming is a nightmare, do they not think before releasing?

• Anonymous
  June 13, 2006
  The comment has been removed

• Anonymous
  June 13, 2006
  Noting that

• Anonymous
  June 13, 2006
  Great decision! WinFX is really designed for Vista and should be an entirely different framework version. Most people don't get that...

• Anonymous
  June 13, 2006
  "MS naming is a nightmare, do they not think before releasing? "
  
  Yes, they do. They try to find the worst action to make.  And they succeed. Just look at comments. They hit the point.

• Anonymous
  June 13, 2006
  OK, quick question - does this mean Microsoft is ready for the "Microsoft drops .Net support for Windows 2000" headlines?  If WinFX won't be back ported to Windows 2000 or other operating systems, then by putting WinFX into .Net 3.0 you're saying that Windows 2000 is no longer a supported .Net platform.

• Anonymous
  June 13, 2006
  Oh how the excitement of keeping tabs on technology thrills us. To quote S. &amp;#8220;Soma&amp;#8221; Somasegar, Microsoft&amp;#8217;s Corporate Vice President of the Developer Division: &amp;#8220;The .NET Framework has always been at the core of WinFX,

• Anonymous
  June 13, 2006
  IT'S ALWAYS LIKE THIS WHE YOU START GET THE HANG OF THINGS ,ALWAYS GOTTA COME SOME ONE AND THROW SAND IN THE FAN.
  IT'S ALWAYS BUSINESS AND ALWAYS WILL BE THE PURPOSE  OF THIS ALWAYS CHANGING NAMES AND VERSION ,IT'S FOR SELLING COURSES ,BOOKS AND BUY MORE SOFTWARE TO ACCOPLISHOUR TASKS.
  
  ANYWAY I THINK WAY TO GO IS THE OPENSOURCE.ORG

• Anonymous
  June 13, 2006
  Soma's blog post announces the name change of WinFX to the .NET Framework 3.0
  The change is only a name...

• Anonymous
  June 13, 2006
  Please don't do this. You will be making confusion out of a name that has clarity. Microsoft should charish the clarity of the .Net Framework name and not trash their hardwork.  

• Anonymous
  June 13, 2006
  GIVE US A BREAK..... let us get used to 2.0 first!

• Anonymous
  June 13, 2006
  Stupid! .Net Framework 3.0 runs on .Net Framework 2.0. Duh! That's more confusion in the long run than you can ever imagine...

• Anonymous
  June 13, 2006
  Why not .Net Framework 2.1 in the tradition of .Net 1.1? Or .Net Framework 2.5: halfway there but not yet there. I mean come on! .Net Framework 3.0 powered by .Net Framework 2.0. Are you a former Java version confusion master?

• Anonymous
  June 13, 2006
  This is the stupidest idea ever. .Net Framework 3.0 runs on .Net Framework 2.0. And don't you dare think C# 3.0 is here. No, no, no. That will come in .Net Framework 4.0 powered by .Net Framework 3.0. Duh?!

• Anonymous
  June 13, 2006
  The comment has been removed

• Anonymous
  June 13, 2006
  The comment has been removed

• Anonymous
  June 13, 2006
  The comment has been removed

• Anonymous
  June 13, 2006
  
  Even you manage technically to get it right this is first a very bad managerial decision, very bad communicated, etc.
  
  It demonstrates a huge lack of understanding of the world outside of the MS labs, more specific - the enterprise environments where .Net platform started to get some acceptance.
  
  it seems that you had in mind just consumer PCs
  
  very sad day :(
  
  
  

• Anonymous
  June 13, 2006
  Since Soma announced the official rename from WinFx to .Net 3.0 everyone is talking about it here, here...

• Anonymous
  June 13, 2006
  The comment has been removed

• Anonymous
  June 13, 2006
  i havent tried it yet but i will let you kmow.

• Anonymous
  June 13, 2006
  Soma and Dev Div,
  
  Are you listening? Do you care for what the developers and customers really want?
  
  It is indeed sad that you have great technologies (mis)handled by a bunch of marketing jokers!!!
  
  Wake up and fix things before more damage is done!
  
  I hope you are reading the comments posted. I also hope it is you who is really blogging and not a proxy from the marketing and corp. affairs!

• Anonymous
  June 13, 2006
  I really hate this change,  WinFX was cool and was sold as a replacement for Win32.  We we told we would finally have an OS API that was object oriented and managed and was not just a platform on top of Win32.
  
  Renaming it to .NET 3.0 and leaving it on a 2.0 CLR is going to add a lot of confusion, especially when "Orcas" is released, are we going to have .NET 3.1 then?  
  
  Please DO NOT DO THIS.  This will just confuse everyone, the old questions of "what is .NET anyway" will all come back.
  
  If anything make WinFX the furture of the .NET Framework.  Drop the .NET name and use WinFX for this release, the next release can be WinFX 2.0 or even 3.0.

• Anonymous
  June 13, 2006
  I think this idea is just plain awful and appalling...

• Anonymous
  June 13, 2006
  There are lots of interesting stuff happening right now! Primarily I'm thinking about BizTalk Server...

• Anonymous
  June 13, 2006
  Wow, it is great to see the level of passion around the .NET Framework!&amp;nbsp; I wanted to add some additional...

• Anonymous
  June 13, 2006
  PingBack from http://www.tudy.ro/2006/06/14/winfx-becomes-net-framework-30/

• Anonymous
  June 13, 2006
  Check out this blog entry from Jason Zander who runs the CLR and Frameworks team at Microsoft.
  
  It tries to shed some light on some of the questions and issues that people have raised here.
  
  http://blogs.msdn.com/jasonz/archive/2006/06/13/630066.aspx
  
  - somasegar

• Anonymous
  June 13, 2006
  The comment has been removed

• Anonymous
  June 13, 2006
  PingBack from http://www.bizwiki.cn/teamblog/?p=122

• Anonymous
  June 13, 2006
  Depuis quelques temps, lorsque je fais une pr&#233;sentation qui traite de &#171;&#160;InfoCard&#160;&#187;, je commence toujours...

• Anonymous
  June 13, 2006
  To the person who wanted to know if I am the one really blogging - yes, I am the one blogging.
  
  - somasegar

• Anonymous
  June 13, 2006
  It is amazing how big an impact names and terminology have on how we think. If you haven't heard, Soma...

• Anonymous
  June 13, 2006
  Posted at Ardent Dev by Derek Hatchard (Go directly to post):  
    In case you've missed all the noise...

• Anonymous
  June 13, 2006
  I am hanging out at Tech-Ed 2006 in Boston this week. After 2 days, I must it continues to amaze me how...

• Anonymous
  June 13, 2006
  PingBack from http://www.alessandrolacava.com/public/blog/?p=54

• Anonymous
  June 13, 2006
  Well in the marketing perspective renaming of WinFx to .NET 3.0 is okay.
  
  Though there is an utterly confusion of code names of pre-saled products of microsoft. e.g Avalon, Indigo, Hailstorm, Whidbey, a lot more...
  
  Better to come up with a naming standard/convention  to avoid such confusions

• Anonymous
  June 13, 2006
  Its okay

• Anonymous
  June 13, 2006
  This is stupid.
  
  So DotNet3 will contain the dotnet 2.0 CLR, the same as dotnet2 does.
  
  Suddenly we disconnect the dotnet version number from the CLR version number.
  
  A confused developer . . .

• Anonymous
  June 13, 2006
  Viele haben sich sicherlich schon gefragt, wie das alles weitergehen soll mit WinFx und &quot;parallel&quot; dem...

• Anonymous
  June 13, 2006
  Don't think its a good move. Come on guys for some time keep .Net stable like VB 6.0 was.

• Anonymous
  June 13, 2006
  I think it's a great move.
  Convincing managers to buy or even install a new product is much harder then an upgrade, so it's that much sooner that developers can actually use the features.
  
  It might have even been even beter to name it 2.1, just  like it happened with the first version.

• Anonymous
  June 13, 2006
  Hello,
  microsoft decided to name WinFX as .NET Framework 3.0 check this:
  .NET Framework 3.0
  Introducing...

• Anonymous
  June 14, 2006
  Someone asked how to send binary attachments between .NET and WebSphere.
  &amp;nbsp;
  After much wailing...

• Anonymous
  June 14, 2006
  by the way..
  what happened to Winfs..?? Is it part of .NET 3.0 ??
  
  Mahesh
  
  

• Anonymous
  June 14, 2006
  Nothing in the name.....Lets see what we will get

• Anonymous
  June 14, 2006
  PingBack from http://targetit.net/?p=218

• Anonymous
  June 14, 2006
  .NET must die, assembles rule (it's true!)! :P

• Anonymous
  June 14, 2006
  .NET must die, assembler rule (it's true!)! :P

• Anonymous
  June 14, 2006
  
   Last Friday Soma announced that WinFX is no more WinFX.&#160; It’s still .NET and WinFX will be .NET 3.0....

• Anonymous
  June 14, 2006
  Wouldn't ".Net Framework 2.0 R2" (Release 2) have been a better name, since the CLR and other libraries are not changing?
  It would be more consistent with other naming trends in MS, and avoid decorrelating the version of the framework from the CLR!
  

• Anonymous
  June 14, 2006
  2Vasya
  .NET must live, assemblies rule :)

• Anonymous
  June 14, 2006
  I agree with Microsoft, and I think a lot of the people who are complaining are confusing things.  My thoughts are here:
  
  http://blog.cooltechu.com/2006/06/14/WinFX+Is+NET+Framework+30++Yes+It+Does+Make+Sense.aspx

• Anonymous
  June 14, 2006
  Will there be a new version of Visual Studio.Net  out soon?

• Anonymous
  June 14, 2006
  We are currently working on the next version of Visual Studio which we call internally as "Orcas".  Later this year, we will start shipping CTPs of Orcas.
  
  - somasegar

• Anonymous
  June 14, 2006
  WinFS is not a part of .NET FX 3.0.  The WinFS team continues to make progress and they are continuing to deliver previews and betas to their customers.
  
  - somasegar

• Anonymous
  June 14, 2006
  Will .NET 3.0 be available on WinXP and can I therefore use WPF, WCF on XP or will .NET 3.0 be Vista Only? What about Linq is that included? If not what version of the framework will Orcas be? Are we going to evolve into .NET 2007 naming conventions

• Anonymous
  June 14, 2006
  "Later this year, we will start shipping CTPs of Orcas. "
  Can I ask how long approximately will it's beta run? Year or longer?

• Anonymous
  June 14, 2006
  The comment has been removed

• Anonymous
  June 14, 2006
  I think WinFx, should be kept as an add-on or "beta" (even if WCF, WWF, WPC and WCS are final versions), until the arrival of a REAL .NET Framework 3.0 takes place (a .NET FX that is truly 3.0 from its CLR and includes all the stuff announced previously like C#, LINQ, ..plus WCF, WWF, WPF, WCS), if they don't do that, the only thing that will take place will be "confussion", and these questions: "what is .NET FX 3.0 really? WinFX on .NET 2.0, a whole new .NET FX? an Add-on for .NET 2.0? a new API?" will be flying around the web....for years, years,..years..maybe until .NET FX 4..:S:S!:P hehe...
  
  Plus, i think they should let .NET FX 2 be used !!!...it's too soon to release a .NET FX 3.0..and i think (as many ppl here), it's coz of the release of Vista....
  
  VS.NET 2005:
  
     .NET FX 2.0 (What we have now) + WinFX (if you want to use it)
  
  VS.NET Orcas
  
    .NET FX 3.0 (C# 3, WCF, WPF, WWF, WCS, ASP.NET 3.0)
  

• Anonymous
  June 14, 2006
  I think WinFx, should be kept as an add-on or "beta" (even if WCF, WWF, WPC and WCS are final versions), until the arrival of a REAL .NET Framework 3.0 takes place (a .NET FX that is truly 3.0 from its CLR and includes all the stuff announced previously like C#, LINQ, ..plus WCF, WWF, WPF, WCS), if they don't do that, the only thing that will take place will be "confussion", and these questions: "what is .NET FX 3.0 really? WinFX on .NET 2.0, a whole new .NET FX? an Add-on for .NET 2.0? a new API?" will be flying around the web....for years, years,..years..maybe until .NET FX 4..:S:S!:P hehe...
  
  Plus, i think they should let .NET FX 2 be used !!!...it's too soon to release a .NET FX 3.0..and i think (as many ppl here), it's coz of the release of Vista....
  
  VS.NET 2005:
  
     .NET FX 2.0 (What we have now) + WinFX (if you want to use it)
  
  VS.NET Orcas
  
    .NET FX 3.0 (C# 3, WCF, WPF, WWF, WCS, ASP.NET 3.0)
  

• Anonymous
  June 14, 2006
  Interesting thing to note also, is that as always, even though in these comments a lot of interesting and valid questions have come up, there is a complete lack of replies from M$.... Not that I think anyone at m$ cares about what ever is written on this page, but you would at least expect Somasegar to .... say something???

• Anonymous
  June 14, 2006
  .Net 영원히...
  
  닷넷이여 영원하라...
  대한민국 짝짝짝짝~

• Anonymous
  June 14, 2006
  Why is it getting late to launch them?
  대~한민국~~ 짝짝짝짝~

• Anonymous
  June 14, 2006
  PingBack from http://asailorskis.com/arch/?p=40

• Anonymous
  June 14, 2006
  Couldn't you just do:
  
  Codename "WinFX" Windows Framework:
  Platform specific managed code API for Windows, based on and extends the .NET Framework.
  
  Codename "NetFX" .NET Framework:
  Platform independent managed code API for many different environments and devices. Core framework for other managed code APIs.

• Anonymous
  June 14, 2006
  The comment has been removed

• Anonymous
  June 14, 2006
  What, already? Well, the .NET Framework 2.0 RTM'ed in Otober last year, so why not? Actually, it has...

• Anonymous
  June 14, 2006
  PingBack from http://sph3r.com/blog/index.php/2006/06/15/winfx-netfx-30/

• Anonymous
  June 14, 2006
  The CLR shoud determine the version number so with CLR v2 the version should  be 2.1. Major version number should only be incremented when the CLR changes.
  
  .NET Framework 1.0 should have been named WinFX 1.0
  
  I thing Microsoft should drop the name .NET Framework and fully adopt the WinFX name if they intend it to replace Win32.
  
  I also think they should drop the .NET suffix from names like ADO.NET and ASP.NET
  
  WinFX should be the managed API
  
  The WinFX could then consists of the following parts
  - CLR
  - Win Forms
  - ASP
  - ADO
  - WCS
  - WF
  - WCF
  - WPF
  - Linq
  - ...
  
  the W in WCS, WPF, WCF should stand for WinFX and not Windows since WinFX is not part of (a specific) Windows (version)
  
  When the CLR is updated (to v3) and these parts are updated to require CLR v3 they should be v3.0. If another update comes that is based on CLR v3 that should be v3.1
  
  is new .NET Framework/WinFX versions supposed to ship along new Windows versions or new Visual Studio Versions?
  
  When new parts are released for WinFX without changes to the CLR then the Minor version should be incremented. If CLR 3.0 is released and later Linq is released then the WinFX should be v3.1
  
  I also think that all managed languages and compilers should have # in their name ie VB.NET should be VB# (like C#) and have the same version number as the CLR that they use (VB 2005 should be VB# 2.0 since it uses CLR 2.0)
  
  One installation directory per CLR version should be used ie
  WindowsWinFXv3.0. The Assemblies should have the major and minor version numbers in their name (ie ADO(.NET) v2.0:  System.Data.v20.dll and ADO(.NET) v2.1: System.Data.v21.dll)
  
  When releasing a Service Pack increment the third part of the version number (.NET Framework 2.0 SP1 should have version number 2.0.1.*)

• Anonymous
  June 15, 2006
  While I don't have any issues with naming/renaming the platforms/frameworks, I truly believe you guys should slow down the rate of introducing version after version in such  short intervals. This is the case for almost all your software/technology, with the exception of VC++/VB6/COM/COM+/ASP etc (IMHO). For all their shortcomings, they lasted longer and the RoI on those was/is actually very good.
  
  Not all companies that use your software, have the resources to train or adapt to keep up with Microsoft.
  
  This is exactly like auto manufacturers marketing and making available their '2007' model in February of 2006.

• Anonymous
  June 15, 2006
  This is a very good move on MS's part.

• Anonymous
  June 15, 2006
  The comment has been removed

• Anonymous
  June 15, 2006
  The comment has been removed

• Anonymous
  June 15, 2006
  Thanks!!! http://www.ringtones-dir.com/get/">http://www.ringtones-dir.com/get/ ringtones site free. [URL=http://www.ringtones-dir.com]ringtones download[/URL]: Download ringtones FREE, Best free samsung ringtones, Cingular ringtones and more. Also [url=http://www.ringtones-dir.com]samsung ringtones[/url] From website .

• Anonymous
  June 15, 2006
  Hi! http://www.ringtones-dir.com/get/ ringtones site free. Download ringtones FREE, Best free samsung ringtones, Cingular ringtones and more. From website .

• Anonymous
  June 15, 2006
  I think renaming WinFX to the Framework 3.0 is a bad idea.  This name change was for branding reasons as people were getting confused about the difference between WinFX and the Framework.  Personally, it all seems very easy to understand.  WinFX as just DLLs written in .NET 2.0.  Upgrading to a new version of the .Net implies that there are significant changes to the underlying architecture such as adding Generic .Net 2.0 where 1.1 didn’t have Generics.  My issue is we are building (and rolling out) a global application that is being used by fortune 100 companies.  Unfortunately, a lot of these big companies are very slow at adopting new technologies.  We have been working very hard to get .Net 2.0 authorized to use.  We were hoping that it would be a minor hurdle to get the blessing to use WinFX once .Net 2.0 becomes authorized since WinFX is written in .Net 2.0.  Even though that’s all it is, just calling it 3.0 will create huge and lengthy obstacles for building and implementing applications using WinFX (.Net 3.0).  This is a big setback in the effort to using the latest and greatest.

• Anonymous
  June 15, 2006
  
  This is causing a great deal of confusion.  This is reminiscent of when Microsoft branded everything with .NET.  I am attending TechEd 2006 and not one person agrees with this name change.

• Anonymous
  June 15, 2006
  Tal y como lo anunciar&#225; S. &quot;Soma&quot; Somasegar, en un reciente&amp;nbsp;post: .NET Framework 3.0, en su blog....

• Anonymous
  June 15, 2006
  Apparently major part of the developers community doesn't like the name change. I'm wondering if MS will consider the opinion of the majority or pretend to be deaf and blind just because the real purpose of this renaming is a bit deeper than making the things more apt?

• Anonymous
  June 15, 2006
  Not one person agrees with this name change, except "Microsoft guys" of course...
  
  Please, Rollback the renaming!!!
  
  

• Anonymous
  June 15, 2006
  PingBack from http://tekkie.wordpress.com/2006/06/16/microsoft-is-confusing-people-again/

• Anonymous
  June 16, 2006
  Gates to end daily MS role, to spend more time running his charitable foundation.&amp;nbsp; Say what you...

• Anonymous
  June 16, 2006
  Microsoft will NOT respond to the vast majority of developers hating this idea. They have proven time and and time again that our opinions do not matter to them - they forge ahead arrogantly, as if they can do no wrong.
  
  Microsoft, do yourselves (and us) a favor and PAY ATTENTION JUST THIS ONCE TO WHAT YOUR DEVELOPERS ARE TELLING YOU!!
  
  This is a BAD idea.
  

• Anonymous
  June 16, 2006
  The comment has been removed

• Anonymous
  June 16, 2006
  BTW, not every Microsoft person agrees with this decision and that is why I posted a comment.  Forget the technical details for two seconds, I am most concerned about the confusion that this is creating with customers.  It could be that in a few months this will all just go away and we won't think of this anymore.
  
  The best argument I have heard for making this name change is the following:
  
  1) The intent is to include WinFX with the .NET Framework.  It makes sense.  ASP.NET, .NET Remoting, Enterprise Services, and Windows Forms are all a part of the framework.  So why shouldn't WinFX?
  
  2) WinFX and the .NET Framework 2.0 are installed on Vista.
  
  3) If I install WinFX, I must install .NET Framework 2.0.  I can't get one without the other.
  
  The big question I have is regarding detecting framework version programmatically.  I cannot just check if the .NET Framework v3.0 is install per the guidance below, or can I?
  
  http://support.microsoft.com/?scid=kb;en-us;315291

• Anonymous
  June 16, 2006
  I love Microsoft and I love .NET.  But this seemingly marketing dept. driven renaming should be nipped in the bud early.  It's not too late to reconsider.
  
  We developers thought we knew what the .NET Framework was.  It was a class library that supported the development of what Microsoft has been telling us can be referred to as "managed" code that compiles to an intermediate layer that can then be compiled just in time to machine code.
  
  The majority of Windows itself and therefore, I would presume Windows Vista, is not so-called "managed" code.  It's not even appropriate to code everything, for example kernel stuff or a device driver, in managed code or to rewrite something that 1000 man-hours were invested in, in managed code just to say you did it.
  
  So the confusion here for me and perhaps other developers is we thought WinFX was a library or API that supported Windows Vista and new technologies being delivered in the Vista timeframe, many of which, possibly even most of which wasn't "managed code" built on the CLR.  And if the CLR was going to expose a lot of this functionality to .NET developers, it would potentially be a layer over WinFX that wrapped WinFX up.  That may have been / may be a mistaken impression.
  
  So it's really confusing to hear that Windows Vista will ship with what we thought was the .NET Framework 2.0, but because it also will ship with a lot of other new technologies the whole thing is going to be referred to as the .NET Framework 3.0.
  
  You guys don't normally like to confuse your customers (which as developers, we are, in this case), and you pride yourself on listening to your customers.  We're confused and not very happy about this naming idea.

• Anonymous
  June 16, 2006
  Beta 2 of WinFX was released a couple of weeks ago. Even though I've been quite excited about what Microsoft...

• Anonymous
  June 17, 2006
  Since they already pushed asp, ado, and winforms into FW, nothing will stop them untill they had it renamed.

• Anonymous
  June 17, 2006
  good

• Anonymous
  June 17, 2006
  I think the renaming was necessary and Microsoft did it at the last possible moment (during TechEd 2006 as the last big developer event before the final roll out).
  
  I follow Microsoft for many years and even I had a hard time figuring out what WinFX really is.
  
  Sure, many developers are not happy about the situation having a .NET Framework 3.0 based on a CLR 2.0 and a "C# 3.0 with LINQ" upcoming that are now becoming C# 3.5 or may be C# 4.0 (many Microsoft products, like VS C++, skipped version numbers in the past and VS InterDev - had a hard time recalling that name - even jumped from 1.0 to  6.0 if I remember that correctly) and will be also based on the CLR 2.0.
  
  But we will get used to this too. Its the price for Microsoft's decision to give up the idea of a managed Windows API (the original idea of WinFX) somewhere in 2004 without telling the developer community about it so many still think of WinFX as an replacement for Win32.
  
  Peter
  

• Anonymous
  June 18, 2006
  The comment has been removed

• Anonymous
  June 18, 2006
  Once again, I vote for dropping "The .NET Framework" if the .NET Framework will consist of more than just the CLR and the Base Class Library.
  
  Release them as seperate products and stop referring to the whole thing as "The .NET Framework" as nobody referred to COM+, MSMQ ... in the past as "The Windows DNA Framework":
  
  Seperate products:
  
  1) CLR with MSCORLIB (mscorlib.dll)
  2) ADO.NET (System.Data.dll)
  3) ASP.NET (System.Web.dll)
  3) Windows (System.Windows.Forms.dll)
  4) ...
  
  Seriously guys, consider this approach and stop having the marketing guys involved in this as "The .NET Framework" is a set of extensions that will be used by developers and not managers. That's right the developers are the target audience here.

• Anonymous
  June 18, 2006
  The comment has been removed

• Anonymous
  June 18, 2006
  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.
  
  Also, it should be made clear how .Net Framework 3.0 distribution will be handled now that the framework seems to include the formerly marketed Windows Vista specific foundations.
  
  And it should be made clear that the formerly marketed Windows Vista specific foundations are going to be made available across all Windows versions that can support the .Net Framework 2.0 onwards.
  
  Questions:
  
  - With WPF, what is the future of Windows Forms?
  - With WCF, what is the future of Enterprise Services?
  
  How will WF and WCS affect the way .Net developers design and develop their applications for Windows and for platforms that support the .Net Framework?
  
  These Windows Vista foundations are drastically altering the .Net Framework as it was introduced since version 1.0. The foundations are pushing many things obsolete, and probably depracated in the long run, as more and more parts of the .Net Framework programming languages are wrapped into a declarative and more expressive languages like XAML and  LINQ.

• Anonymous
  June 19, 2006
  PingBack from http://tariqayad.com/blogs/tangiblethoughts/archive/2006/06/19/25.aspx

• Anonymous
  June 19, 2006
  The comment has been removed

• Anonymous
  June 19, 2006
  I haven't gotten around to writing the next part of &quot;Zen and the Art of Reflection&quot; yet, because I'm...

• Anonymous
  June 19, 2006
  The comment has been removed

• Anonymous
  June 19, 2006
  PingBack from http://www.davecentral.net/2006/06/10/chris-pirillo-doesn%e2%80%99t-get-second-life-and-gives-us-windows-vista-stats/

• Anonymous
  June 20, 2006
  Let WinFX live!!!!

• Anonymous
  June 20, 2006
  Quite confusing. WinFX sounds good. .Net Framework 1.1 then 2 and now 3.0 with just WinFX change :-( Hard to take it.

• Anonymous
  June 21, 2006
  We're getting ready to start the planning process for the next release of Enterprise Library for .NET...

• Anonymous
  June 21, 2006
  Why not call it .NET Framework 2.1?

• Anonymous
  June 21, 2006
  I'm with Thomas on this - what happens when CLR 3.0 is ready?  (Framework 4.0: now with CLR 3.0?)  If it's an additive release, wouldn't it be better to have it be a minor version change?  We had 1.0 and 1.1, why not call this 2.1?

• Anonymous
  June 21, 2006
  Since it will use CLR 2.0, ".NET Framwork 2.5" looks better to me.
  
  

• Anonymous
  June 21, 2006
  PingBack from http://billsbaby.com/index.php/2006/06/22/windows-vista-are-we-missing-the-point/

• Anonymous
  June 22, 2006
  where can i download .NETFramework 3.0 for windows 2003 server

• Anonymous
  June 22, 2006
  personally I think it's a terrible idea, I agree with Chuck on the confusion it causes(3.0?4.0).
  
  In order to use WinFx you need to understand it and it's relationship to .NET. If you don't know, or it confuses you, you're not the kind of person who should be worrying about it.
  
  if you have to rename it, why not do the usual MS trick and bundle it under a different integration monicker, I'm thinking ".NET live" seeing as everything else is live these days.
  
  .NET 3.0 is the single worst thing you could rename it after iNet or .Niit . . . . .

• Anonymous
  June 22, 2006
  I need this to help me with a program im trying to run

• Anonymous
  June 23, 2006
  The comment has been removed

• Anonymous
  June 23, 2006
  So I'm glad to announce that the WinFX June CTP&amp;nbsp;has just&amp;nbsp;arrived; you&amp;nbsp;can find the download...

• Anonymous
  June 23, 2006
  Looks like it's time for a fresh batch of WPF (.Net 3.0) goodness.&amp;nbsp; Tim Sneath points us to the...

• Anonymous
  June 23, 2006
  Did anyone (in Microsoft) think of getting some feedback from the public before making this name change?
  
  

• Anonymous
  June 23, 2006
  Winfx's (renamed to .Net Framework 3.0) June CTP is available here. I know its been a while since I posted...

• Anonymous
  June 23, 2006
  The upcoming Windows Vista will be shipping with a technology called WinFX, which gives software developers (such as myself) a new set of interfaces to write applications against.&#160; These interfac ...

• Anonymous
  June 23, 2006
  Well how about .NET 2006? And then next year .NET 2007? So people would stop mapping the version number to the CLR version number.

• Anonymous
  June 23, 2006
  Microsoft as merged Dot Net 3.0 with WinFX.&amp;nbsp; Not only will you have the standard base class libraries,...

• Anonymous
  June 23, 2006
  The comment has been removed

• Anonymous
  June 24, 2006
  Pues,&amp;nbsp;al fin salio a la luz la relacion que tendra&amp;nbsp;WinFx y .NET Framework, Despues de la incertidumbre...

• Anonymous
  June 24, 2006
  Microsfot's .Net 3.0 CTP release reflects the renaming of WinFX to .Net 3.0. What's in a name!
  
  Download...

• Anonymous
  June 24, 2006
  PingBack from http://ekrishnakumar.wordpress.com/2006/06/25/microsoft-net-framework-30/

• Anonymous
  June 24, 2006
  PingBack from http://www.ararat.org.il/net-framework-30

• Anonymous
  June 24, 2006
  PingBack from http://www.ararat.org.il/net-framework-30-2

• Anonymous
  June 25, 2006
  PingBack from http://sarathc.wordpress.com/2006/06/25/39/

• Anonymous
  June 25, 2006
  PingBack from http://sarathc.wordpress.com/2006/06/25/39/

• Anonymous
  June 25, 2006
  PingBack from http://sarathc.wordpress.com/2006/06/25/net-framework-30/

• Anonymous
  June 25, 2006
  Kleefy sent me these cool blocks from his recent trip to Boston
  
  &#160;Thanks Kleefy!!
  We all know that...

• Anonymous
  June 27, 2006
  Seriously when I read this I had to check the date to ensure that it wasn't dated April 1.
  
  Who suggested this idea in the first place? I find this decision utterly idiotic, regardless of the justification. So .NET Framework 3.0 will contain .NET Framework 2.0. Good luck trying to explain that to your customers!

• Anonymous
  June 28, 2006
  In a way I think it makes sense.  If the CLR is mature enough for .NET to move on without it, that's OK.
  
  Remember, it's the ".NET Framework".  WinFX is a "Framework".  It makes a lot of sense these move on together.  The fact that the CLR hasn't changed is really just details.
  
  The .NET framework now has workflow and a better communications system.  I think whats confusing people here is before the framework has grown upwards, now it's growing outwards.
  
  I was an early skeptic, but have come around to see their side (after a large scale war in my office).
  
  Cheers all

• Anonymous
  June 28, 2006
  Very informative site.
  http://www.butalbital-plus.com
  [url=http://www.butalbital-plus.com]butalbital addiction[/url]
  <a href="http://www.butalbital-plus.com">butalbital addiction</a>

• Anonymous
  June 28, 2006
  why don't you guys just use Java??

• Anonymous
  June 28, 2006
  Is CLR and GAC is going to be revised again for Framework 3.0 ?

• Anonymous
  June 28, 2006
  The comment has been removed

• Anonymous
  June 29, 2006
  ANATOLY

• Anonymous
  June 29, 2006
  You guys must have full time employees whose only task is to come up with marketing terms and confuse your customers...ala DDE, Ole, ActiveX, COM, etc.
  

• Anonymous
  June 29, 2006
  The comment has been removed

• Anonymous
  July 02, 2006
  Hi
  
  will CLR of .NET 2.0 will change or remain same.
  When will u people planning to release .NET 3.0 .
  
  "baki sab theek,  Namskar "
  
  Raghevndra

• Anonymous
  July 04, 2006
  After overcoming some obstacles with our publishing tools these past few days, we finally are able to...

• Anonymous
  July 11, 2006
  The upcoming Windows Vista will be shipping with a technology called WinFX, which gives software developers (such as myself) a new set of interfaces to write applications against.&#160; These interfac ...

• Anonymous
  July 12, 2006
  What with the announcement of WinFX being renamed to .Net 3.0, there has been some confusion as to exactly...

• Anonymous
  July 13, 2006
  This should explain it well enough but to summarize, WinFX has been rebranded as .NET Framework 3.&amp;nbsp;...

• Anonymous
  July 13, 2006
  With all the hype around WinFX one question that repeatedly com up is &quot;what happens to .Net?&quot;. This blog...

• Anonymous
  July 19, 2006
  Si vous ne savez pas &#224; quoi correspond la d&#233;nomination &quot;.NET Framework 3.0&quot;, vous devriez jeter un oeil...

• Anonymous
  July 25, 2006
  That got your attention didn't it! Sorry cheap shot. In actual fact, with the intention of getting rid

• Anonymous
  July 31, 2006
  As the VSTA Premier Support team works with more and more developers who are integrating VSTA into their

• Anonymous
  August 01, 2006
  PingBack from http://soci.hu/blog/index.php/2006/08/02/winfx-net-fw-30/

• Anonymous
  August 06, 2006
  PingBack from http://blog.vijay.name/index.php/2006/08/06/internet-explorer-7-not-to-have-different-name-in-windows-vista/

• Anonymous
  August 07, 2006
  在 2006 年 6 月，微软副总裁 S. Somasegar 宣布 WinFX 将更名为 .NET Framework 3.0

• Anonymous
  August 08, 2006
  PingBack from http://spicycode.com/articles/2006/06/09/net-3-0-is-coming-oh-wait-its-not

• Anonymous
  August 09, 2006
  PingBack from http://www.centplus.com/for-the-recordi-am-disheartened-by-andrew-barons-decision-to/

• Anonymous
  August 10, 2006
  David Boschmans, the developer evangelist for Belgium and Luxembourg, announced on his blog that they

• Anonymous
  August 17, 2006
  Beta 2 of WinFX was released a couple of weeks ago. Even though I&amp;#39;ve been quite excited about what

• Anonymous
  August 24, 2006
  PingBack from http://www.centplus.com/aba-report-on-presidential-signing-statements-a-so-whatrsquos-wrong/

• Anonymous
  August 27, 2006

• Anonymous
  August 28, 2006
  Here's a post&amp;nbsp;from Somasegar about WinFX being renamed to .NET Framework 3.0.&amp;nbsp; Seems to make...

• Anonymous
  September 01, 2006
  Endnu engang har vi f&#229;et en omd&#248;bning af de kommende teknologier &amp;ndash; det er n&#230;sten ikke til at f&#248;lge

• Anonymous
  September 02, 2006
  Consumers of the .NET Framework more andmore question the reasoning behind .NET Framework versioning.

• Anonymous
  September 05, 2006
  ... C# 3.0, LINQ, .NET 3.0, CLR 3.0, Orcas, ADO.NET 3.0, WinFX--&gt;.NET 3.0? Whoaa!! wait a minute !!...

• Anonymous
  September 08, 2006
  The summer was suprisingly very busy time for me so I suspended blogging for some time. There is a lot...

• Anonymous
  September 18, 2006
  PingBack from http://chagel.com/blog/?p=14

• Anonymous
  September 21, 2006
  PingBack from http://www.centplus.com/net-framework-30when-speaking-to-developers-about-winfx-one-question/

• Anonymous
  September 30, 2006
  PingBack from http://www.centplus.com/windows-vista-net-30-and-windows-sdk-compatibility-matrixi-originally/

• Anonymous
  October 02, 2006
  WCS non è Windows CardSpace !!! Questa mattina, leggendo il blog di Richard Turnerleggo questa strana

• Anonymous
  October 04, 2006
  PingBack from http://www.alexandre-gomes.com/?p=71

• Anonymous
  October 06, 2006
  The most talked about platform - the Winfx that encompassed the major breakthroughs including the Communication

• Anonymous
  October 09, 2006
  Vineri am anunţat că vom utiliza numele de .Net Framework 3.0 pentru tot ce-a &icirc;nsemnat p&acirc;nă

• Anonymous
  October 13, 2006
  PingBack from http://www.centplus.com/net-framework-30when-speaking-to-developers-about-winfx-one-question-2/

• Anonymous
  October 14, 2006
  PingBack from http://www.centplus.com/geezerville-usa-wordpress-blog-designquality-work-backed-by-incredible-support/

• Anonymous
  October 16, 2006
  I came across the following post on MSDN This morning. "Vice President S. Somasegar describes the decision

• Anonymous
  October 18, 2006
  PingBack from http://www.centplus.com/net-framework-30when-speaking-to-developers-about-winfx-one-question-3/

• Anonymous
  October 25, 2006
  The comment has been removed

• Anonymous
  October 26, 2006
  随着Windows Vista的发布日期日益临近，被Windows平台上的开发者寄予厚望的下一代开发平台也逐渐浮出了水面。

• Anonymous
  October 30, 2006
  PingBack from http://www.javanet.tw/ckbase/?p=12

• Anonymous
  November 06, 2006
  PingBack from http://www.sheysrebellion.net/blog/?p=31

• Anonymous
  November 08, 2006
  Microsoft .NET Framework download | Microsoft .NET Framework 3.0 Final x86 [ 50 MB]download | Microsoft .NET Framework 3.0 Final x64 [ 54 MB]

• Anonymous
  November 10, 2006
  PingBack from http://jsmags.wordpress.com/2006/11/10/microsofts-net-30-june-ctp-is-here/

• Anonymous
  December 04, 2006
  As our VSTA Premier Support team here at Summit Software works with more and more developers who are integrating VSTA into their applications, we get a lot of questions about the .NET Framework. Some of these questions arise from the fact that Windows

• Anonymous
  December 16, 2006
  When Apple released OS X, they described a native framework called Cocoa within the operating system that would make developing on it so much easier than before. As most OS X programmers will tell you - it's either Cocoa or...

• Anonymous
  December 25, 2006
  PingBack from http://jlinv.mx500.com/blogs/?p=111

• Anonymous
  January 12, 2007
  PingBack from http://www.hecgo.com/2006/06/14/net-framework-30-formerly-winfx/

• Anonymous
  January 23, 2007
  Microsoft has renamed WinFX to the .NET Framework 3.0 .NET Framework 3.0 aptly identifies the technology

• Anonymous
  January 30, 2007
  PingBack from http://www.buunguyen.net/blog/?p=13

• Anonymous
  March 19, 2007
  PingBack from http://jcesar.3stecnoinformatica.com/2006/06/14/la-conspiracion-redmond/

• Anonymous
  March 27, 2007
  The .NET Framework has always been at the core of WinFX, but the WinFX brand didn’t convey this. The

• Anonymous
  April 14, 2007
  PingBack from http://sanal.org/?p=117

• Anonymous
  April 28, 2007
  答：当你安装 .NET Framework 3.0 时，installer 会检查你是否已经安装 .NET Framework 2.0，如果没有，.NET Framework 3.0 installer 会替您安装 .NET Framework 2.0，然后再安装 .NET Framework 3.0 component；答：因为 .NET Framework 3.0 只有在 .NET Framework 2.0 之上加入新的 components，所以 .NET Framework 3.0 与

• Anonymous
  May 10, 2007
  答：当你安装 .NET Framework 3.0 时，installer 会检查你是否已经安装 .NET Framework 2.0，如果没有，.NET Framework 3.0 installer 会替您安装 .NET Framework 2.0，然后再安装 .NET Framework 3.0 component；答：因为 .NET Framework 3.0 只有在 .NET Framework 2.0 之上加入新的 components，所以 .NET Framework 3.0 与

• Anonymous
  May 15, 2007
  Aki még nem hallotta esetleg az MS bejelentette, hogy mostantól a korábban WinFX néven futó sok-sok újítást

• Anonymous
  June 25, 2007
  A new .NET framework already?

• Anonymous
  June 25, 2007
  PingBack from http://www.nyveldt.com/blog/post/A-new-.NET-framework-already.aspx

• Anonymous
  August 14, 2007
  2006年6月，MicrosoftCorporate副总裁S.Somasegar宣布，WinFX将更名为.NETFramework3.0。请查看他的博客，了解详细信息。 本文...

• Anonymous
  September 16, 2007
  The comment has been removed

• Anonymous
  September 17, 2007
  fun codes free myspace layouts

• Anonymous
  October 29, 2007
  DotNet Framework 3.0

• Anonymous
  November 10, 2007
  PingBack from http://danieloskarsson.se/?p=65

• Anonymous
  November 15, 2007
  The comment has been removed

• Anonymous
  December 15, 2007
  .NET Framework 3.0　版本命名與部署 Q

• Anonymous
  December 21, 2007
  where do u download???

• Anonymous
  January 03, 2008
  在2006年6月，微软副总裁S.Somasegar宣布WinFX将更名为.NETFramework3.0，请知道更多详细资料请看它的Blog。 这份文件包含了关于.NE...

• Anonymous
  January 08, 2008
  Hmm, but then if you are still using the same CLR 2.0, why did you want to make a major version number change for the .NET framework. As a .NET developer I will not find any changes in .NET 2.0 and .NET 3.0 then. Is that right?

• Anonymous
  January 23, 2008
  I kind of liked the sound of WinFX, but Soma decided to rename it back to .NET Framework 3.0. I guess

• Anonymous
  March 06, 2008
  PingBack from http://www.fastchicken.co.nz/index.php/2006/06/10/winfx-net-30-oh-no-not-again/

• Anonymous
  April 04, 2008
  在 2006 年 6 月，微软副总裁 S. Somasegar 宣布 WinFX 将更名为 .NET Framework 3.0，请知道更多详细资料请看它的 Blog。 这份文件包含了关于 .NET Framework 3.0 更名常被问到的问题，对于部署额外的问题请参照 MSDN 上的 .NET Framework 3.0 deployment 文件。 问 1：什么是 .NET Framework 3.0（先前代号 WinFX）？ 答：.NET Framewrok 3.0 是微软受管理程式码编写模型，它是..

• Anonymous
  May 05, 2008
  Vista 64bit is the most unreliable piece of garrbage I have ever tried. What a waste of my time

• Anonymous
  May 26, 2008
  PingBack from http://josedailynews.gigazu.com/microsoftnetframework30.html

• Anonymous
  May 29, 2008
  PingBack from http://francesca.rightnewsdigest.info/netframework3.html

• Anonymous
  June 12, 2008
  PingBack from http://adan.videositeonline.com/netframework.html

• Anonymous
  June 23, 2008
  when the .net framework 3.0 will be available in xp and 2003 server ??

• Anonymous
  July 08, 2008
  PingBack from http://armani.vidsdigest.info/renameit30.html

• Anonymous
  July 22, 2008
  So after reading all that I'm still not 100% clear - I'm sorry! - can I remove the 2.0 now I have the 3.0 installed on my comp running XP?

• Anonymous
  July 22, 2008
  Fair Trade - You should not uninstall .NET 2.0.  The versions of the framework are built on top of eachother so that 3.5 won't run without 3.0 which won't run without 2.0.  This makes each release smaller as just additive on top of the previous version. -Meghan

• Anonymous
  July 24, 2008
  i doing an assignment on winFS PROGRAMMING MODEL and i cnt understand the difference between it and WinFX and .Net framework

• Anonymous
  July 29, 2008
  Detect CLR version under which your BizTalk service is running.

• Anonymous
  August 19, 2008
  Now as .net 3.5 has came, more improvements has been done...

• Anonymous
  October 21, 2008
  PingBack from http://spicycode.wordpress.com/2006/06/09/dotnet-30-is-coming-oh-wait-it%e2%80%99s-not/

• Anonymous
  December 03, 2008
  You've got to be kidding me . &quot;The .NET Framework has always been at the core of WinFX, but the WinFX brand didn&rsquo;t convey this. The WinFX brand helped us introduce the incredible innovations in terms of Windows Presentation Foundation (WPF),

• Anonymous
  May 27, 2009
  Хороший блог :) Люблю почитывать каждый вечер (ну и в другое время тоже :)).

• Anonymous
  May 29, 2009
  PingBack from http://paidsurveyshub.info/story.php?title=somasegar-s-weblog-net-framework-3-0

• Anonymous
  June 12, 2009
  PingBack from http://insomniacuresite.info/story.php?id=4691

• Anonymous
  June 15, 2009
  PingBack from http://debtsolutionsnow.info/story.php?id=2005

• Anonymous
  June 15, 2009
  PingBack from http://unemploymentofficeresource.info/story.php?id=4357

• Anonymous
  June 16, 2009
  PingBack from http://workfromhomecareer.info/story.php?id=11999

• Anonymous
  October 05, 2009
  what does this democratizing application life-cycle management means? will there be elections on visual studio.net 2010

• Anonymous
  January 06, 2010
  Do I need 2.0 and 3.0 to both be installed? In add/remove programs it says I have both, but are they both necessary? or could I just delete one?

• Anonymous
  January 26, 2010
  a simple illustration of .net framework http://vb.net-informations.com/framework/framework_tutorials.htm gever

• Anonymous
  February 03, 2010
  There is no doubt in my mind what so ever that Profit lance will show you how to make money online, but there are many obstacles your going to face in order to do it or to get to where I am at. What I mean is, there's allot of information, tools and resources in this course that your going to have to get familiarized with before you can become successful. Yes you will earn money but to make a living out of it your going to really need to understand how everything works. www.onlineuniversalwork.com

• Anonymous
  February 04, 2010
  The Beginning The working life is already tough enough, but the worries of being out of work was even tougher. The unsecured working environment have prompted me to search the internet for an alternative source of extra income so that I could learn how to Make Money Work for me and be Financially Independent. I listed down a number of Free Internet Business Opportunity Ideas while researching ways how people earn money online while working-from-home.......      www.onlineuniversalwork.com

• Anonymous
  March 26, 2010
  thanks for you share`` You've got to be kidding me . &quot;The .NET Framework has always been at the core of WinFX, but the WinFX brand didn&rsquo;t convey this. The WinFX brand helped us introduce the incredible innovations in terms of Windows Presentation Foundation (WPF),   i love <A href="http://www.umbrellabuy.com/">umbrellas<A>very much

• Anonymous
  April 15, 2010
  Please provide the difference between 1.1, 2.0, 3.0 and 3.5.