Microsoft .NET Framework Redistributable Package (x86)

1.0 stars

"Lousy, lousy, lousy."

March 13, 2012  |   By OldGrumpy

Pros

Couldn't find a single solitary one pro.

Cons

I wanted to download Net 2.0; my computer already had 4.0 installed, but the program I was attempting to run said it needed both 2.0 and 4.0 to run properly. Since I already had 4.0, my computer refused to add 2.0 Consequently, I never got to add 2.0 and my program malfunctioned without it's addition just as its designer said that it would.

Summary

Sometimes Windows determination that it knows better than you how to run the computer on which it is installed is very good; it's a big improvement over the time when one had to enter everything with a code to print, or save, display, or whatever. But there are other times when Windows stubborn refusal to follow the simple instructions of its owner make its owner want to throw Windows and the computer it controls out the nearest window, and return to the good old un-automated Mac. This was one of those times for me. It is analogous to the automatic shift in an automobile as opposed to the standard. Most of the time, the automatic is preferable; but there are some occasions when the automatic simply will not do what the stick shift can, and then one wishes one had not spent the extra bucks for the automatic. But having made the decision automatic or stick at the time one bought the car, it is too late to change later on when one needs the performance possible with the stick even if it only happens once every 30,000 miles. That was my case here. (I solved my problem by putting my program on a Vista machine. It already had 2.0, and didn't need 4.0 to work; awkward for my use, but doable.)

Reply to this review

Thank you for submitting your feedback!

Was this review helpful? (0) (0)