Eraser 6 requires dotnet 3.5 or higher.
in [Freeware]
|
Prev: Hail Ceaser
Next: anthology of anthems
From: bob on 24 Dec 2009 22:27 In article <DKOdnVHWic6YarDWnZ2dnUVZ_j2dnZ2d(a)posted.ccountrynet>, q34wsk20(a)yahoo.com says... > > bob wrote: > > John Corliss wrote: > >> The latest version of Eraser: > >> > >> http://eraser.heidi.ie > >> > >> requires dotnet 3.5 to be installed. This fact is *not* listed anywhere > >> on the site AFAICT and I just wasted 20 minutes of my life dealing with > >> a failed installation and removing all traces of the changes it imparted > >> to my system. > >> > >> I reluctantly went with dotnet 2 when I installed my new Canon camera's > >> software, but I'll be damned if I'll ever install the horribly bloated > >> dotnet 3.5 runtime on my system. Your mileage may vary, but for me > >> Eraser is effectively no longer being developed. Guess I'll install > >> version 5.84 back on my system, or try the update to it (ver. 5.8.8) > >> unless it requires dotnet 3.5 too. > >> > >> It would have been nice if the developers had mentioned somewhere on > >> their website that Eraser now requires dotnet 3.5 to be installed. It > >> would have saved me a lot of time. > > > > Let me get this straight: You'll load the 63MB .Net 2.0 runtime but not > > the 28MB .Net 3.5 runtime because it's "horribly bloated?? > > It's what they do after they're installed that really counts. On my > system, 3.5 slows things down perceptibly. And yes, I actually have had > it installed in the past. > What kinds of slow downs are you talking about? > I'd rather rather do without dotnet altogether though. It's all just > bloat from my perspective. I started programming in IBM 360 Assembly language. I'll take .Net over it any day. Different strokes for different folks. Bob
From: John Corliss on 25 Dec 2009 08:50 bob wrote: > In article <DKOdnVHWic6YarDWnZ2dnUVZ_j2dnZ2d(a)posted.ccountrynet>, > q34wsk20(a)yahoo.com says... >> bob wrote: >>> John Corliss wrote: >>>> The latest version of Eraser: >>>> >>>> http://eraser.heidi.ie >>>> >>>> requires dotnet 3.5 to be installed. This fact is *not* listed anywhere >>>> on the site AFAICT and I just wasted 20 minutes of my life dealing with >>>> a failed installation and removing all traces of the changes it imparted >>>> to my system. >>>> >>>> I reluctantly went with dotnet 2 when I installed my new Canon camera's >>>> software, but I'll be damned if I'll ever install the horribly bloated >>>> dotnet 3.5 runtime on my system. Your mileage may vary, but for me >>>> Eraser is effectively no longer being developed. Guess I'll install >>>> version 5.84 back on my system, or try the update to it (ver. 5.8.8) >>>> unless it requires dotnet 3.5 too. >>>> >>>> It would have been nice if the developers had mentioned somewhere on >>>> their website that Eraser now requires dotnet 3.5 to be installed. It >>>> would have saved me a lot of time. >>> Let me get this straight: You'll load the 63MB .Net 2.0 runtime but not >>> the 28MB .Net 3.5 runtime because it's "horribly bloated?? >> It's what they do after they're installed that really counts. On my >> system, 3.5 slows things down perceptibly. And yes, I actually have had >> it installed in the past. >> > > What kinds of slow downs are you talking about? Much slower bootups and shutdowns. >> I'd rather rather do without dotnet altogether though. It's all just >> bloat from my perspective. > > I started programming in IBM 360 Assembly language. I'll take .Net over > it any day. Different strokes for different folks. A lot of programmers like dotnet, a lot of users hate it. I'm in the latter group. -- John Corliss BS206. Using News Proxy, I block all Google Groups posts due to Googlespam, and as many posts from anonymous remailers (like x-privat.org for eg.) as possible due to forgeries posted through them. No ad, cd, commercial, cripple, demo, nag, share, spy, time-limited, trial or web wares OR warez for me, please.
From: Dave U. Random on 25 Dec 2009 11:09 John Corliss wrote: Hey dimwit... Tell us again how pretty colored slogans that say "free software included" have you convinced Micro$oft is giving away Office. ROTFLMAO!
From: bob on 27 Dec 2009 19:27 In article <1umdnZgcz6-UXqnWnZ2dnUVZ_qFi4p2d(a)posted.ccountrynet>, q34wsk20(a)yahoo.com says... > > bob wrote: > > In article <DKOdnVHWic6YarDWnZ2dnUVZ_j2dnZ2d(a)posted.ccountrynet>, > > q34wsk20(a)yahoo.com says... > >> bob wrote: > >>> John Corliss wrote: > >>>> The latest version of Eraser: > >>>> > >>>> http://eraser.heidi.ie > >>>> > >>>> requires dotnet 3.5 to be installed. This fact is *not* listed anywhere > >>>> on the site AFAICT and I just wasted 20 minutes of my life dealing with > >>>> a failed installation and removing all traces of the changes it imparted > >>>> to my system. > >>>> > >>>> I reluctantly went with dotnet 2 when I installed my new Canon camera's > >>>> software, but I'll be damned if I'll ever install the horribly bloated > >>>> dotnet 3.5 runtime on my system. Your mileage may vary, but for me > >>>> Eraser is effectively no longer being developed. Guess I'll install > >>>> version 5.84 back on my system, or try the update to it (ver. 5.8.8) > >>>> unless it requires dotnet 3.5 too. > >>>> > >>>> It would have been nice if the developers had mentioned somewhere on > >>>> their website that Eraser now requires dotnet 3.5 to be installed. It > >>>> would have saved me a lot of time. > >>> Let me get this straight: You'll load the 63MB .Net 2.0 runtime but not > >>> the 28MB .Net 3.5 runtime because it's "horribly bloated?? > >> It's what they do after they're installed that really counts. On my > >> system, 3.5 slows things down perceptibly. And yes, I actually have had > >> it installed in the past. > >> > > > > What kinds of slow downs are you talking about? > > Much slower bootups and shutdowns. > I'm really confused. How would the presence of the .Net runtime affect startup and shutdown? Bob
From: Craig on 28 Dec 2009 02:11
On 12/27/2009 05:23 PM, Bear Bottoms wrote: > Bear Bottoms<REMOVEbearbottoms1(a)gmail.com> wrote in > news:Xns9CEEC3F3E7EA1bearbottoms1gmailcom(a)69.16.185.247: > >>> I'm really confused. How would the presence of the .Net runtime >>> affect startup and shutdown? >>> >>> Bob >>> >> >> There is nothing wrong with .NET and some very good programs are built >> around it. >> > > Here is one comment: > "While .NET may not be the best solution for everyone (you may prefer to > run a Java and Unix solution), it's definitely not vaporware; it's here > to stay. But how far will it go? In a worst-case scenario, it will never > make it beyond the realm of Windows. ..Net's grew beyond Windows some time ago. It's called Mono <http://www.mono-project.com/Main_Page> fwiw, -- -Craig |