back to article Go ahead and un-install .Net, but you'll CRIPPLE Windows Server 2012

Microsoft has posted some unusual advice for those considering the removal of the .Net Framework from Windows Server. The advice is notable because the authors say the side-effects of removing .Net have become “an issue that we are seeing increasingly being reported in support.” The side-effects are likely to be severe, because …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.

In other news...

...Microsoft also requires Win32 APIs to be present for Windows Server to run!

.NET isn't an application that users install to perform a particular task, it's a platform that components (including those in Windows) are built on. It doesn't stop you from running Java, and it doesn't try and run the Java apps for you.

If users don't want .NET in RAM then they'll pretty much need to pick a different OS.

25
2
Silver badge

Re: In other news...

> If users don't want .NET in RAM then they'll pretty much need to pick a different OS.

In other words, Microsoft has learned their lesson from the IE brouhaha, and now make sure the technologies they want to push are so insinuated in to OS functionality that they can not be removed.

Personally I think Microsoft can get away with pretty much anything now, as the rise of slabs and cellphones have meant that Microsoft is no longer seen as a de-facto monopoly.

5
9
Silver badge

Re: In other news...

"In other words, Microsoft has learned their lesson from the IE brouhaha, and now make sure the technologies they want to push are so insinuated in to OS functionality that they can not be removed."

You are getting the two horribly mixed up. .Net is not trying to push out the competition order to get revenue / market share gain, it's a key part of the OS that many MS technologies rely on.

7
3
Anonymous Coward

Re: In other news...

"Uh? Don't remove it, but you may have to remove it?"

Quite obviously they mean don't leave it uninstalled permanently, but as part of a reinstall it is OK to temporarily uninstall it.

7
1
Silver badge

Re: In other news...

> Net is not trying to push out the competition order to get revenue / market share gain, it's a key part of the OS

Really? I thought .Net was a software framework Microsoft's been pushing for years by integrating it with its near-monopoly OS, and which is in direct competition with other platforms which are not made by Microsoft and not installed in Windows by default.

2
4
Silver badge

Re: In other news...

It is a software framework, yes. And MS use it themselves to build all the software that runs on their software platform.

I don't see why this notion is hard for you.

2
0
Silver badge

.NET is evil

.Net, like IE and Active X, are so intrinsic to the MS OS that you cannot really uninstall them.

5
26
Silver badge

Re: .NET is evil

What's wrong with it being there, supplying the platform for things to run on?

Don't want it? Don't go Windows. Don't understand how this huge THING that does THINGS is there IN YOUR MACHINE DOING STUFF... well, it's a set of APIs and you're a moron.

13
3
Anonymous Coward

Re: .NET is evil

"are so intrinsic to the MS OS that you cannot really uninstall them."

Sort of like the numerous libraries that Linux has in /lib then?

11
2

Re: .NET is evil (maybe not, inefficent, perhaps)

/lib contains libraries for numerous packages. They are not an interlinked all or nothing collection.

Of course most linux users know that already.

Most savvy linux people like to keep the installed packages to a minimum to reduce the amount of space taken up by s/w and the associated libraries, which is why mono (the linux .net implementation) is not popular as it loads a lot of additional libraries to run one program. It's also whay gnome people resent running KDE programs, and vice versa, because the libraries for the non-native dialogs and other services have to be loaded as well.

This may go a long way to explaining this item in the news, it raised flags to somebody that this might be a problem.

3
0
Silver badge

Re: .NET is evil

I'm rather platform agnostic. Been using everything at one time or another since 1978.

So every now and then I'm going to rile some fansbois of everything as well.

Get over yourselves. Every system has flaws and the biggest problem I see and my beef is that it seems like the entire IT industry is always moving 1 step forward, a jump to the left, 2 steps back and jump to the right and one step forward again.

.Net, Active X and IE are known vulnerability vector. Period. Updates are often problematic and have been for years and years. Just because the newest version is finally stable doesn't mean the next one will be and sure as hell doesn't forgive the pain from the previous version.

1
4
Silver badge
Stop

Re: .NET is evil

Name one .NET attack vector. Just one. I'll wait.

2
1
Silver badge

Re: .NET is evil

Downvote but no response because you can't name one.

Lame.

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: Name one .NET attack vector. Just one. I'll wait.

Why, don't you know how to use Google? Well OK then. MS13-004.

Still waiting? Then how about MS14-009?

MS13-082? MS13-040? MS09-061?

Still waiting? MS13-052? MS12-074? MS12-038? MS12-035? MS11-039?

Still waiting?

MS11-028? MS11-044? MS11-078? MS10-077? MS10-041? MS10-060? MS09-061?

Still waiting?

Maybe your time could be more productively spent learning how to know what you're talking about before you go shooting your mouth off on the internet, eh? Googling is a super effective first step.

0
0
Gold badge

Yeah no kidding...

Yeah, the 2012 interface uses .NET, so .NET has to be installed. That does raise the question though, since Microsoft does say that there may be situations where .NET must be removed, is 2012 Server in fact useable sans GUI?

As for legal issues... well, the previous bundling was a pretty different situation. They were claiming software was inseperable that simply wasn't, using their position in the OS market to take out competition in other markets. In this case, Powershell relies on .NET, and I think the admin utilities rely on Powershell, it really is all pretty inseperable.

1
1

Re: Yeah no kidding...

It is usable sans-GUI - server core. Whether it's usable without Powershell/.Net, that's another thing. I can see how it might be in theory, if you enjoy walking into the server room every time you need to make a change to the box, or you have an iLO/Drac card in the box.

1
1
Silver badge

Re: Yeah no kidding...

If you have no GUI and no command line (ie, powershell) what have you got except a very expensive fan heater?

3
0
Bronze badge

Re: Yeah no kidding...

>Microsoft does say that there may be situations where .NET must be removed

No, that was a stupid mistake by the journalist. Read the text: MS does say that there may be situations where .NET must be reinstalled from a cleaned base.

2
0

Re: Yeah no kidding...

The text is ambiguous at best. remove/reinstall could indicate that it is talking about removing and then reinstalling, or it could mean remove _or_ reinstall.

It's not really clear why you'd want to (permanently) uninstall .net. The fact that it is used by so much of the system means that unless you don't want those bits you shouldn't uninstall it. That would be like uninstalling Microsoft Office because it was too big and then complaining you couldn't open Word documents. Presumably it would be possible to write an alternative set of APIs, GUI shell, command line etc and run it on the Windows kernel. But why bother when it's all there in .net and it's _dependent_ utilities.

1
0
Bronze badge
Facepalm

Re: Yeah no kidding...

"I can see how it might be in theory, if you enjoy walking into the server room every time you need to make a change to the box, or you have an iLO/Drac card in the box"

You do realise that you can quite happily RDP in to a server core box in just the same way as any other Windows (2k+) box? Not to mention the fact that most the PowerShell or admin tools will of course work quite happily remotely (once remote management is enabled)?

0
0
Gold badge

In fairness, this is only .NET 4 we're talking about. The phenomenally bloated previous versions aren't even installed by default on Win8 (and I presume not on 2012 either).

Also in fairness, Powershell is way better than CMD.EXE. (Edit: ...and considerably lighter than cygwin.)

2
0
Bronze badge

I'm sure this'll get me some downvotes, but PowerShell is my favourite shell on any platform.

Mind you, second place would be the Amiga shell, optional case sensitivity on a file by file basis needs to come back.

3
1
Silver badge

Time to Migrate.

Actually we found Server 2003 so bloated compared to NT 4.0 Server and Win 2000 Server we moved to Linux. Been using NT Server since 1994.

7
4
Anonymous Coward

Re: Time to Migrate.

If the last Microsoft Server thing you used was Server 2003, then definately try Server 2012 R2 - faster than Linux for most things - including as an NFS Server! No GUI by default. Powershell is much more powerful than say BASH - if you are equally skilled on both like me, Server 2012 is the much more pleasant and better platform to use for most purposes.

10
12

Re: Time to Migrate.

Lets get past this no GUI by default is total rubbish. Server core is the Linux equivalent of running an X11 server with TWM and some xterms, except they are newer and prettier. You still need a video card, with appropriate driver and you still get a graphical interface. It is by no stretch of the imagination a text interface that could be redirected over a serial port for a headless configuration.

Anyone that claims that server core has no GUI has absolutely no concept of what that actually means.

7
7
Anonymous Coward

Re: Time to Migrate.

"Lets get past this no GUI by default is total rubbish"

No, it's great. You can do everything locally or remotely via Powershell - which is a bit like a UNIX shell, but a lot more powerful. Hyper-V Server doesnt even have a GUI option for instance.

"You still need a video card"

Just like any enterprise Linux then.

"with appropriate driver"

No - it's a generic VGA driver.

"and you still get a graphical interface."

No - you dont - you get a text based interface. It might use more colour by default than the Linux console, but it's still only text based.

"Anyone that claims that server core has no GUI has absolutely no concept of what that actually means."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graphical_user_interface

"a type of user interface that allows users to interact with electronic devices through graphical icons and visual indicators such as secondary notation, as opposed to text-based interfaces"

You were saying?...

11
4
Anonymous Coward

Re: Time to Migrate.

What applications did you port? And what did your rebuild? Out of interest.

0
0
Bronze badge

Re: Time to Migrate.

<If the last Microsoft Server thing you used was Server 2003, then definately try Server 2012 R2 ....>

And a honey to run SQL 2014 on.

1
1
Anonymous Coward

Simple explanation

By "remove/reinstall", they mean remove and reinstall it, to repair a broken installation perhaps.

Yes, a slash often means 'or', but here it's just being used as a separator.

3
0
Silver badge
WTF?

What a load of old

cock, quote James May.

The MS EcoSystem is an unholly mess. People still slag off RedHat for 'dependency hell' but this???

Deserves a WTF?

3
7
Bronze badge

How desperate are you guys for news now? Scraping the barrel on your MS bashing efforts I feel.

I'm not aware of .net "using ram" or "cpu" when nothing is using it, so I'm not sure what that cobblers is about.

7
2
Silver badge

It doesn't. It does use HDD though and to be fair, there's very little in Server 2012 that doesn't use it to some extent.

Really though, all this is just the usual cretins saying "I SHOULD BE ABLE TO UNINSTALL THE PROGRAM AND IT STILL WORKS AS IF IT WAS INSTALLED WAH WAH WAH".

Yeah. Try uninstalling Excel and then running an Excel spreadsheet in Excel. That's what you're asking for.

7
1
Silver badge

In other news water is wet, the sky is blue and if you remove enough system libraries from Linux / OSX / Unix / BeOS / other OS of choice it will become unstable too.

14
0
Bronze badge

Ah yes....

...this is the top quality after sales service that Microsoft apologists claim is worth paying for over open source!

1
3
Silver badge

Re: Ah yes....

At the enterprise level, if you don't pay for support for your open source software you're a damn fool who deserves everything he gets.

The "it costs money" argument is only valid at the home user/enthusiast level.

Please leave it at home.

0
0

This non-story falls well below The Register's usual standards

Is the author ignorant of the nature of .Net or just pretending to be to scrape up a story.

“It is not recommended to uninstall .NET Framework. In some given circumstances, there may be a requirement to remove/re-install .Net Framework on Windows Server 2012/2012 R2.” is hardly "weird advice".

I enjoy most Register stories, but please try harder.

3
0
Bronze badge

they are saying..

Servers should be light and nimble, not fast fitted together via high level code running on a bloated framework.

Weird. 'Server bloat comes as standard' seems to be what they are saying.

0
0
This topic is closed for new posts.

Forums