Service Pack 1 for VS 2008 and .NET FX 3.5 released!


We released Visual Studio 2008 and the .NET Framework 3.5 last November.  The feedback has been tremendously positive, but developers always have new ideas and suggestions for how we can improve the development experience for them.


 


Building on the base of great features in VS2008 and .NET 3.5, I am happy to announce today the release to manufacturing of the .NET Framework 3.5 SP1 and Visual Studio 2008 SP1.


 


In Visual Studio 2008 SP1 we have concentrated on improving performance and reliability. We have worked on our designers for building WPF applications and improved their performance, we have improved tools for developing AJAX applications, improved designers for working with the ADO.NET Entity Framework, and included a richer JavaScript development environment and a streamlined Web site deployment experience.


 


In the .NET Framework we went a little further.  Beyond fixing the customer reported bugs we also added some highly requested features to make it easier to develop applications for the latest platforms.  Some of these new features include the .NET Framework Client Profile, enhanced support for database application development through the ADO.NET Entity Framework, ADO.NET Data Services and integration with (recently released!) SQL Server 2008, and multiple enhancements to ASP.NET.


 


Whenever we talk to developers, one of the major pain points that they face is deployment of their .NET applications due to the time it takes to install the .NET Framework.  This is something we know we needed to work on and have delivered a great solution in SP1 with the .NET Framework Client Profile.


 


The .NET Framework Client Profile setup contains just those assemblies and files in the .NET Framework that are typically used for client application scenarios.  This reduced size framework (86.5% reduction from 197MB to 26.5MB) is the fastest and easiest way to deploy Windows applications.  The .NET Framework Client Profile also makes it possible to extend the improved download and installation experience to existing .NET applications. As an added bonus, with work done in the service pack, services connecting to .NET applications will also see up to 10 times the amount of performance improvement when running in Internet Information Services (IIS) 7.0.


 


Continuing to focus on the development of Web 2.0 applications and dynamic Web sites, ASP.NET Dynamic Data is now offered with SP1 which provides a rich scaffolding framework that allows rapid data-driven development without writing code.



 


 


This release also comes right in step with the recent release of SQL Server 2008.  With this service pack, Visual Studio 2008 and the .NET Framework 3.5 also support SQL Server 2008, making the Microsoft platform the most comprehensive environment for database application development.  The .NET Framework 3.5 SP1 includes ADO.NET Data Services and ADO.NET Entity Framework, which raise the level of abstraction for database programming and supply both a new model-based paradigm and a rich, standards-based framework for creating data-oriented Web services.


 




 


 


This release of SQL Server is very important to us for the developer community and it is special in another way for me personally.  This week marks the ten year anniversary of the India Development Center which I started and continue to sponsor.  SQL Server 2008 is the first SQL release with significant in-box contributions from this development center including SQL Server Compact 3.5.1.  I am very proud of the work that they have done on this release.


 


Namaste!


 

Comments (96)

  1. Al día de hoy se ha liberado el service pack 1 de VS2008 y el NET Framework 3.5 . Este Service Pack contiene

  2. Today we shipped Service Pack 1 (SP1) for both Visual Studio 2008 and the .Net Framework 3.5.  This

  3. Microsoft .NET Framework 3.5 Service Pack 1, Visual Studio 2008 Service Pack 1, and Team Foundation Server

  4. Publicación del inglés original : Lunes, 8 de agosto de 2008 10:12 AM PST por Somasegar . El pasado mes

  5. Soma, senior VP of the Developer Division, just announced on his blog that the Service Pack 1 for VS

  6. int19h says:

    My congratulations to the entire MS DevDiv, and to the Visual Studio team in particular. This was a long-awaited release with lots of tasty new stuff, and it’s great to finally get all the goodness (also, at least one of my Connect feature requests is implemented in there, and that just feels good). Though why shyly call it a "service pack", when it’s really and obviously much more than that, is beyond me…

    Oh yes, and bring it on! We’re already waiting for Entity Framework 2 with full roundtrip here :)

  7. Just in case mine is the only blog you subscribe to, SP for the MS developer platform is out now.  

  8. El dia de hoy fue lanzado el SP1 de Visual Studio 2008 y .NET Framework 3.5 . Aquí les comparto un mensaje

  9. Aaron Marten says:

    This morning, we’ve shipped Visual Studio 2008 SP1 & .NET 3.5 SP1 to the web. Soma has more

  10. Visual Studio 2008 and .NET Framework 3.5 Service Pack 1 Released

  11. Vincent says:

    Hmm I can’t install it :/ I tried to install VS SP1 and got this error (under Vista x64 SP1, all in French (Vista, VS)):

    [8/11/2008, 21:46:40] Action: Performing Action on Exe at L:vs90sp1dotnetfx35.exe…

    [8/11/2008, 21:46:40] (IronSpigot::ExeInstallerBase::Launch) Launching CreateProcess with command line = dotnetfx35.exe /q /norestart /lang:ENU /progress CartmanSetupExeWatcher1135984392

    [8/11/2008, 21:47:40] (IronSpigot::ExeInstallerBase::EnsureExitCodeIsAnMSIErrorCode) Original exit code: L:vs90sp1dotnetfx35.exe returned non-MSI error code: 0x800b0100

    [8/11/2008, 21:47:40] (IronSpigot::ExeInstallerBase::PerformAction) Exe (L:vs90sp1dotnetfx35.exe) failed with 0x80070643

    [8/11/2008, 21:47:40] (IronSpigot::ExeInstallerBase::PerformAction) PerformOperation on exe returned exit code 1603 (translates to HRESULT = 0x80070643)

    [8/11/2008, 21:47:40] (IronSpigot::LogUtils::LogFinalResult) Final Result: Installation failed with error code: (0x80070643)

    I cleaned a bit the logs, is it happening to someone else ?

  12. MegP_MS says:

    Vincent –

    If you have setup issues, a great first resource is Heath’s blog: http://blogs.msdn.com/heaths/archive/tags/VS+2008+SP1/default.aspx.  Here’s a useful entry about collecting setup log information and where to get help: http://blogs.msdn.com/heaths/archive/2008/05/09/visual-studio-and-net-log-collection-utility.aspx

    -Meghan

  13. KK says:

    Great!!  I thought VS2008 SP1 was expected  towards the end of the year with Silverlight 2.  So is Silverlight 2 RTM pretty close to RTM as well; like is it also expected this month?  What about Blend 2.5?

  14. Service Pack 1 for Visual Studio 2008 and .NET Framework 3.5 is out now. We had a chance to work Microsoft

  15. Guru Stop says:

    Very Quick Note: Visual Studio 2008 Service Pack 1 was released finally (in combination with .NET Framework

  16. Visual Studio 2008 Service Pack 1 has been released and it’s available on the Microsoft Download Center.

  17. "Basados en las mejores características de VS2008 y .NET 3.5, estoy satisfecho de anunciar hoy el lanzamiento…

  18. As noted earlier today in this post on Soma’s blog , the .NET Framework 3.5 SP1 and Visual Studio 2008

  19. Martintr says:

    Please do not install this SP1 if you are doing Silverlight development using Entity Framework or WCF/ADO Dataservices as Silverlight 2b2 is incompatible

    with this Service Pack.  

    These will not work and you will be forced back to SP1 Beta 1.

    Thanks

  20. samiq says:

    ping back from [bits.samiq.net]

    [… check out the official post on the release at Soma’s Blog …]

  21. Somasegar’s WebLog : Service Pack 1 for VS 2008 and .NET FX 3.5 released! (소식) Download details Visual

  22. Tyler Jensen says:

    Congrats, Soma! I just finished my install and it all went smoothly. I can’t wait to explore it.

    -Tyler

  23. E gata și SP1 , cu suport complet pentru SQL Server 2008 (inclusiv VSTS), cu WPF și WCF optimizate, cu

  24. Visual Studio 2008 and the .NET Framework 3.5 Service Pack 1 (SP1) is not a traditional service pack

  25. That's right, SP1 for Visual Studio 2008 and .NET Framework 3.5 went live today . You can read about

  26. Wictor Wilen says:

    Microsoft has now released the final bits of Visual Studio 2008 Service Pack 1 and the .NET Framework 3.5 Service Pack 1, download here. A lot of stuff has been improved such as stability and performa…

  27. 猿頁 says:

    出ましたねー。 今回のは単なるバグフィックス集ではなく、けっこう新しい機能等が入っているので、期待…

  28. No proszę, cały czas przedzieram się przez pourlopową skrzynkę i dociera do mnie coraz większy update

  29. As mentioned yesterday .NET Framework 3.5 SP1 and Visual Studio 2008 SP1 were released. Here is a more

  30. Mohamed Omar says:

    My WoRm Congratulations to all the teams in the Dev. division and especially to Soma and ScottGu

    I am veryexcited about all of these releases…

    Mohamed

  31. Stu Smith says:

    This would have been great news… but it seems that the .NET 3.5 SP1 breaks the use of WPF under IIS.

    (Why would anyone do that? Well it’s a really nice way of building up images on-the-fly, ready for serving out for use in a web application).

    There’s a thread up at forums.asp.net:

    http://forums.asp.net/t/1299963.aspx

    Is there anyone we could contact at MS to look into this issue?

    Thanks in advance,

    Stu Smith

    (stusmith at pobox dot com)

  32. As you probably know by now, we’ve released Visual Studio 2008 Service Pack 1 and the .NET Framework

  33. Jim Losi says:

    Compilation for web sites under 3.5 raises an error

    see: http://forums.asp.net/t/1304386.aspx

    for the problem and my work-around

    Also, NTML auth breaks for the debugger under Win 2003, IIS6 and VS 2008 SP1. I simply cannot debug any sites with sp1.

    I hate to say it, but for the first time ever I am recommending that no-one installs this SP.

    Regards

    Jim Losi

    C# MVP 2007-2008

  34. In case you haven’t heard, the .Net FX 3.5 Service Pack 1 and VS 2008 Service Pack 1 have been released!

  35. Ted says:

    What has been added to the core .NET framework?  

    We’re holding off on .NET 3.0 and later features until we can see if Silverlight will give us an almost WinForms development environment.

    Asp has been good to use since classic ASP, but we’ve not found enough overall value added to upgrade/rewrite our existing ASP.NET applications to .NET 3.5.  We base this on the estimated 5 year cost of a web application with 75% of that being after it goes into production.  In other words, maintenance costs are much too high for our existing ASP.NET applications (ASP.NET 1.x, ASP.NET 2.x).

    When will Silverlight be released with a Winforms like programming interface?  Version 1.x’s current programming interface basically re-wraps existing web technology like we use in ASP.NET 2.0 along with the high maintenace costs.

  36. dpblogs says:

    Regarding compat between the client library for data services in Silverlight Beta 2 and the server bits in the .NET Framework 3.5 SP1 RTM release, please see this blog post:

    http://blogs.msdn.com/astoriateam/archive/2008/08/12/compat-note-silverlight-beta-2-client-net-framework-3-5-sp1-server-components.aspx

    -Mike Flasko

    ADO.NET Data Services Program Manager

  37. TimF says:

    I can offer two suggestions to improve the next version of VS.  

    1)  Anything that is installed when you install VS should uninstalled when you uninstall VS.  Don’t drop 50 random pieces that have to be uninstalled separately.

    2)  Make sure the blasted thing installs no matter what existing stuff is on the machine.  I haven’t been able to install vs2008, I have no idea why.  The only way I managed to install VS2005 was on a freshly installed box.  This isn’t right.  (It’s failing to install rc.exe and for some reason needs that to build unmanaged C or C++.)  Checking msdn for help on the issue I see a bunch of suggestions "reinstall".  I call BS.  If it didn’t install correctly the first time, what are the chances it will reinstall correctly the second time ?  Does the reinstall require uninstall first ?  See #1.

  38. WebDevTools says:

    Hello Jim,

    Thank you for reporting the issue about NTLM auth not working for debugging with SP1 on Win2k3 for IIS6.  With your help we were able to narrow down the issue to a change which affects debugging on Win2k3 when using custom host headers in IIS.

    The version of system.dll in SP1 contains a include a loopback check security feature that is designed to help prevent reflection attacks on your computer.  This same check also prevents debugging with custom host headers on Win2k3.  Fortunately a simple workaround exists to the the issue that enables debugging for this particular scenario.  The workaround is described in this KB article: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/896861

    Thanks again for your help in identifying the issue and bringing it to our attention.

    Omar Khan | Visual Studio Product Team

  39. consumer4beta@hotmail.com says:

    Will there be a separate SP2 release for just .NET 2.0 like there was .NET 2.0 SP1 which can be installed on Windows 2000 SP4?

  40. David says:

    One of the nice feature I saw in "Visual Studio 2008 Team Foundation Server Service Pack 1" is "Links to Team System Web Access pages from notifications". Unfortunately i found no documentation how to enable it. After deep searching in the files of the SP1 update package found and option for TfsAdminUtil.exe that will enable this functionality. (TfsAdminUtil.exe configureconnections /TSWAUri:<uri>)

    I was happy that i found it until I saw the result of it. The sourcecontrol checkin notification doesn’t works well.

    For more details see my feedback to Microsoft: https://connect.microsoft.com/VisualStudio/feedback/ViewFeedback.aspx?FeedbackID=361594

    It’s possible that I’m missing something so I’m waiting for others to try it also.

    Regards,

    David.

  41. Jim says:

    You’re welcome, Omar. Happy to help :)

  42. AlexanderN says:

    Would love to install it, but the installation failed :

    ps: Maybe I have  to remove silverlight 2beta first <g>

  43. We just announced the release of Service Pack 1 for VS 2008 and .NET FX 3.5 . A major push for this release

  44. We just announced the release of Service Pack 1 for VS 2008 and .NET FX 3.5 . A major push for this release

  45. [Updated 8/13/2008 with the release of Visual Studio 2008 SP1.] With the many releases of the Microsoft

  46. See Soma’s blog entry for more information.&#160; Also, I updated the table that maps Visual Studio versions,

  47. SP1 is here ; complete with the revved 3.5 Enhancements Training Kit. Jonathan reveals all , including

  48. buckh says:

    David, I’ve posted in your MSDN forum thread the details on the issue with checkin notification emails.  

    http://forums.microsoft.com/msdn/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=3744309&SiteID=1&mode=1

    Buck

  49. Ross Hawkins says:

    Echo Chamber ; SP1 for VS 2008 and .NET 3.5 released;

  50. Khurram Aziz says:

    Soma announced the availability of Visual Studio 2008 Service Pack 1 and .NET 3.5 Service Pack 1 . Installation

  51. David Jacobson says:

    My experience just seems to be echoing a previous comment.  Silverlight2 Beta2 does not seem to work with the RTM version of VS 2008 SP1.  It may be some kind of corruption in the new version of Silverlight2 Beta2 that is preventing it from installing.  It may be something that I am not understanding about the sequence of installs that is supposed to get this to work.  But I don’t need Silverlight.  Now that I have totally removed Silverlight2 from my system I don’t seem to be having any problems with VS2008 SP1 or .net 3.5 SP1.  I will not try to install Silverlight again until there is good reason to expect it to work.

  52. Sam says:

    Please do not release anything without testing all your development products together. VS.NET, Service Packs, etc  must work with SQL Server 2008, Silverlight, and any other development/design products (like Expression Studio 2). Why does Microsoft expect users of its products to suffer un-install, re-install and other non-sense to get these common development products to work together in harmony everytime a new SP is released.

    I must add that removing beta products is sometimes a nightmare situation. The transition from installed beta products to installing RTM products needs improvement.

  53. Neal says:

    Ack!  Installed Visual Studio Tuesday.  Succeeded but poorly, many problems, including several odd errors and warnings in application and system logs.  

    After a full day Wednesday of removing everything Visual Studio and .NET related (hard, they broke, wouldn’t repair, wouldn’t uninstall, wouldn’t force reinstall) and tweaking services I finally managed to get .NET versions back and only have no errors or warnings in logs.

    This morn I started by installing Visual Studio, partial install.  Succeeded with ony two odd errors in logs.  Whoa, what’s this now, Service Pack 1 for VS 2008 and .NET FX 3.5.  Ok, let’s get it over with.  First thing I noticed one hour into the install was that the service pack was installing things I chose not to install.  The trouble started when I rebooted though.  The install somehow trashed my administrator account.  Rolled back via system restore.  Ack! Everything Visual Studio and .NET is still wacky.  Can’t repair, must roll back further and reinstall all.  Long day ahead of me – again.

  54. Martin says:

    I posted this on the WPF Forum.  I thought I should share this here:

    I’m beginning to think the Developer Division has lost their collective minds. The latest .NET redistributable is 231.5 MB! We are an ISV and we need to ship the Framework with our installer.  Is it really reasonable to expect us to ship a 231.5 MB installer?  I heard there was a forthcoming .NET Framework Client Profile and was really excited about that.  Unfortunately, I think it’s still inadequate.

    It seems to really only addresses this one scenario:

    (1) Windows XP, No .NET Framework 2.0 or greater installed.

    Otherwise, we have to use the full blown .NET 3.5 installer.  This includes any of the following scenarios,

    (1) .NET 2.0 or greater installed

    (2) All Vista Users

    (3) All Windows Server users

    When I was at Mix, all the softies seemed pretty oblivious to the fact that microsoft was shipping a >200MB redistributable for .NET 3.5.  Just to make sure everybody understands this, if you click on the bottom of the following page to download the redistributable you’ll be presented with a truly massive dowload:

    http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=333325FD-AE52-4E35-B531-508D977D32A6&displaylang=en

    (EDIT: SP1’s even bigger, coming it at 231.5MB)

    We ship a client application and it’s not realistic for us to say to our users "ok… go ahead and download this installer from Microsoft, run it, and then run our installer."  This may be fine for development products like Expression Blend, but as we ship software for somewhat less technical users, we need to install the framework for them.  To have our own branded installer, it’s looking like we’re going to still have to ship that massive 200MB installer.  Please let me know if I’m wrong here.

    On a related note, I think the .NET Framework team has introduced a problem here that’s worse than old DLL Hell.  Imagine… Just to get a development feature like LINQ, I have to ship a 200MB installer with my application! I’m actually fearful that I’m going to have to ship .NET 2.0 with our applications forever and will never be able to use new features of the .NET framework because the framework is only getting bigger!  Is it really so bad that i might ship System.Linq.dll and System.Linq.XML.dll with my own application.  Is it reasonable to make me pay 175MB of overhead just to get LINQ?  I’ve been truly frustrated about this and think that WPF and thereby .NET Client Apps might unfortunately be doomed because it’s just so hard to get deployment right.  I don’t think even Microsoft ships any apps that install the .NET Framework 3.5 other than Expression and Visual Studio.

    I don’t mean to trash the teams that work on this, but the deployment scenarios are pretty horrible for the .NET Framework.  It’s been truly frustrating for me and I think it’s only getting worse with the decisions to make the Framework this Big Monolithic Thing.  I’m worried .NET 4.0 will be 400 megs.  I’m worried that just to use F# I’m going to have to balloon our installer to 10 times its original size.  Right now, I feel like the .NET Framework is a dead end for client applications.  Should I trust Silverlight after getting burned with the first iteration of .NET?

  55. Simon | ASP.NET says:

    Jim, (Jim Losi): We apologize for the inconvenience the ASP.NET compilation issue you reported has caused and really appreciate all the help you have been giving us to resolve the issue.

    The behavior you are seeing is the original behavior of ASP.NET 2.0. When the .NET Framework 3.5 and Visual Studio 2008 were introduced, a bug was introduced that affected certain pageBaseType scenarios that unfortunately were not intended. It seems as if you might have run into one of these scenarios. In the .NET Framework 3.5 SP1, the bug was fixed and these scenarios no longer occur; pageBaseType again works the same as in ASP.NET 2.0, as requested by customers. Unfortunately, this means that customers who have relied on the unintended behavior that was introduced in the .NET Framework 3.5 will now encounter problems when they run their applications.

    We are now evaluating creating a HotFix for these scenarios and providing workarounds for customers to help with this issue.  

    Here are some details about the issue; we  will post a more detailed description soon. The mismatch is caused by the class in the code file not being assignable to the pageBaseType that is defined in the web.config file. The sequence that occurs is this:

    – During code generation for a page (MyPage.aspx) in a Web site, ASP.NET creates a separate class from the class that is defined in the code-behind file source (MyPage.aspx.cs). The web.config file’s pageBaseType value can be used in cases where you want all pages to have certain properties. It applies to all pages, not just to pages that do not have code-behind files.

    – If MyPage.aspx has a CodeFile attribute and therefore inherits from a class that is defined in MyPage.aspx.cs, the class defined in MyPage.aspx.cs must extend the pageBaseType class.

    To work around this problem, you can do the following:

    1. If the pageBaseType class (for example, MyBasePage) is not needed for all pages, you can remove it from the web.config file, or;

    2. Where pages do require the pageBaseType value, modify the classes in the code-behind files to extend the base type. In the filename.aspx.cs code-behind file, make sure that the class inherits from the pageBaseType that is specified in the web.config file (for example, public partial class CodeFileClass : MyBasePage instead of public partial class CodeFileClass : System.Web.UI.Page).

    3. An alternative workaround will allow you to add the following attribute to your page directive:

    CodeFileBaseClass="System.Web.UI.Page"

    Again, thank you for your help in resolving the problem.

  56. consumer4beta@hotmail.com says:

    I agree with several above posters that the deployment situation is real bad for the .NET Framework even if MS has introduced the client profile.

  57. anonymous says:

    One of the most idiotic things that made me really angry is that MS includes the full 231 MB .NET 3.5 runtime as part of the VS 2008 SP1. No problems here since obviously I understand VS cannot function without .NET 3.5 and it is a redistributable for machines that don’t have it. BUT WHY WILL MS NOT STATE THAT IT ALREADY INCLUDES THE .NET 3.5 RUNTIME? I ended up downloading the whole .NET 3.5 runtime first and then the 831 MB service pack ISO where the 231 MB was redundant. Another thing that spoils the experience unnecessarily is that the IA-64 runtime is for a totally different class of processors which is not mainstream. Why does MS include IA64 components with every download is beyond me. Common sense would dictate produce separate IA64 versions because those would be very lesser required/lesser downloaded versions. By not bundling IA64 and the whole .NET 3.5, MS can save a whopping 300 off the ISO. Microsoft needs to understand that not everyone in the world is on unlimited high-speed broadband connections and do the needful. I hope my feedback is not wasted.

  58. RJ says:

    Download link of MSDN Library for Visual Studio 2008 SP1, referenced in "Visual Studio 2008 Service Pack 1 (SP1) Readme", is BROKEN

    the link is: http://download.microsoft.com/download/A/2/8/A2807F78-C861-4B66-9B31-9205C3F22252/www.microsoft.com/downloads

  59. Nakahara San says:

    Hello. While trying to install ASP.net 3.5 SP1 on one of our test server, we received the following message:

    The Microsoft .NET Framework 2.0SP1 (x64) (CBS): [2] Error: Installation failed for component Microsoft .NET Framework 2.0SP1 (x64) (CBS). MSI returned error code 14098

    So, we opened the error log file and the part of the log in which we had problem was:

    [08/14/08,17:34:44] Setup.exe: GetGlobalCustomProperty – Property: {BBE1827C-F2FD-4FDA-A6D6-C83B62FFFDCA} – PropertyName: compfailed – Value: 0

    [08/14/08,17:34:44] Microsoft .NET Framework 2.0SP1 (x64) (CBS): Command Line after  token replacement.

    [08/14/08,17:34:44] Microsoft .NET Framework 2.0SP1 (x64) (CBS): "C:Windowssystem32WUSA.exe" "c:d15284420177316c80c5wcudotNetFrameworkdotnetmspx64NetFX2.0-KB948609-v6001-x64.msu" /quiet /norestart

    [08/14/08,17:34:44] Microsoft .NET Framework 2.0SP1 (x64) (CBS): CBSComponent Action: CreateProcess launched with cmd line : C:Windowssystem32WUSA.exe "C:Windowssystem32WUSA.exe" "c:d15284420177316c80c5wcudotNetFrameworkdotnetmspx64NetFX2.0-KB948609-v6001-x64.msu" /quiet /norestart

    [08/14/08,17:34:45] BWaitForMSI(): Verifying we’re the only installation currently in progress.

    [08/14/08,17:34:45] BWaitForMSI(): Ready to proceed with installation.  Continuing…

    [08/14/08,17:36:44] Microsoft .NET Framework 2.0SP1 (x64) (CBS): C:Windowssystem32WUSA.exe exited with return value 14098

    [08/14/08,17:36:44] InstallReturnValue: GFN_MID NET Framework 2.0SP1 x64 (CBS), 0x3712

    Any clues about what’s happening?

  60. Nakahara San says:

    Sorry, i forgot to tell that our server runs the Windows Server 2008 Enterprise Edition in Portuguese language with all the security updates and no third part software installed… The only thing we installed is the IIS 7 and nothing else. But even so the server does not accept the installation of ASP.Net 3.5 SP1. We already tried to install the ASP.Net 3.5. After that, we tried to install ASP.Net 3.5 SP1 and even so the installation hangs out at the same point and the error log shows the same message above.

  61. James says:

    Why is the .NET Client Profile (255 MB) larger than the .NET Framework full package (231 MB)? I thought, the Client Profile was to ease the deployment scenarios?

  62. Kevin (MS) says:

    Martin and James:

    The 200mb package you’re referring to actually contains several versions of the framework – only one of which is installed on any given computer.  In fact, the bits downloaded and installed for the full x86 .Net 3.5 SP1 is typically 40-60mb depending on the computer.  

    The good news is that you only need include the install bootstrapper (just 280K) in your setup package to install the .NET Framework:

    •       We are providing a setup bootstrapper (280K) that will allow developers to customize the user interface and provide an integrated, consistent experience regardless of where it is being installed (ie. Vista, XP, Server 2003 or 2008).

    •   The bootstrapper will download and install the appropriate components for a given computer.

    •   The Client Framework bootstrapper can be customized to deploy the client profile (by default) or the full .NET Framework

    •   For a full framework install, a typical x86 client computer download will only be 40 – 60 MB depending on the operating system.  

    •   The Client Profile is a new install option in .NET 3.5 SP1. It’s a smaller subset of the .NET Framework specifically targeted for client application deployments like yours.

    •   Client Profile payload is ~28MB. The initial download of the web based installer again is 280KB.

    •   Client Profile contains the features needed by the client application developers; Windows Forms, ClickOnce, Common Language Runtime, Windows Presentation Foundation and Windows Communications Foundation.

    Finally, computers with .NET Framework versions 2.0, 3.0, and 3.5 will automatically update to 3.5 SP1 in the months following the release on Windows Update.

    We are still putting the finishing touches on the new bootstrapper and will provide further details on the Client Profile, the bootstrapper as well as some other deployment options for your client application needs soon.

    Hope this helps

  63. anonymous says:

    But there is no solution for non-internet based deployments. This is where MS is missing the point. What’s the problem in making x86, x86-64 and IA-64 separate?

  64. Visual Studio 2008 Service Pack 1 and .NET Framework 3.5 Service Pack 1 is out the door. See http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/vstudio/products/cc533447.aspx

  65. 原文地址 : Service Pack 1 for VS 2008 and .NET FX 3.5 released! 原文发表时间 : Monday, August 11, 2008 10:12 AM

  66. anonymous says:

    I request Microsoft to make available a separate .NET 2.0 SP2 for those who want have Windows 2000 and those who can’t/don’t want to install .NET 3.5 SP1 yet.

  67. Congratulations Soma and all the Microsoft team.

    The SP1 just finished installing, and went smooth. As a student, I am really looking forward to experiencing the new improvements. Cheers.

  68. Martin says:

    Hello Kevin,

    Thanks for your response.  The problem with the bootstrapper, as constructed is that the bootstrapper is only viable for a subset of our customers.  Pretty much anybody using a Proxy server can’t use it to install and, to be frank, the on-demand installs have a pretty high failure rate, somewhere between 5-10% in my experience.

    This means that for our full install, we’ll still have to ship a 240MB installer (231 megs of .NET and 10 megs of our stuff).

    To be frank, I don’t know why the team bothered with the Client framework at all.  If the only way to ship it is with an on-demand install, it doesn’t seem to provide much benefit.  Instead of downloading 40-60 megs on demand, it downloads 27.  It’s not exactly a watershed savings. The way a client framework would have actually been useful is if all you ever needed was that 27MB runtime and it installed side by side with the full framework (ala Silverlight).

  69. turkey says:

    Sorry, i forgot to tell that our server runs the Windows Server 2008 Enterprise Edition in Portuguese language with all the security updates and no third part software installed… The only thing we installed is the IIS 7 and nothing else. But even so the server does not accept the installation of ASP.Net 3.5 SP1. We already tried to install the ASP.Net 3.5. After that, we tried to install ASP.Net 3.5 SP1 and even so the installation hangs out at the same point and the error log shows the same message above.

  70. Jimmy says:

    Please make *just* the client profile (offline version) available for download instead of bundling the full .NET along with it. Kind of defeats the purpose. Also, the deployment guide states that the XPS Essentials Pack isn’t included in the client profile. However the downloadable XPS Essentials Pack right now isn’t installable on XP SP3 and gives an error message.

  71. Ian Ellison-Taylor says:

    Jimmy: yes, we’ll make the client profile available *but* the full version is still needed for some important scenarios. We’ll be publishing a new deployment guide soon that explains all this properly, sorry for the confusion. We’ll look in to the XPS issues too.

  72. Ian Ellison-Taylor says:

    Jimmy: I just spoke with the XPS team and they’re working on a fix (no date they can share quite yet) but unfortunately the only workaround is to install the full .Net Framework or install the XPS Essentials Pack before installing SP1.

  73. has released . w00t! For the XML Tools team this is an especially big release since SP1 is the vehicle

  74. Earlier this month, we released .NET 3.5 SP 1 .&#160; One of the new features available in this update

  75. Michael says:

    Is the .NET Framework 3.5 sp1 available as an iso too?

  76. Fernando says:

    Good SP1,  but smooth  instalation?

    to Hell again ? alot MB ?

    iso images, CD no space? DVD is for CD ?

  77. Fernando says:

    Crazy people at microsoft? users and developers too !

    SQL Server 2008 Express, free tools for big problems?

    Downloads  incomplete?  Hard to install and running ?

    Un-install,  Re-Install,  fixed tools, updates, service packs, betas ?

    Agile, Unit Test, Extreme  development at MS ?.

    “Something Stupid ..Frank”.

    Post.     On Win XP SP3:      Msxml6r.dll   you can´t install…  older version.

        Power shell not installed .

        Remove Server  2005 Express Tools

         http://sqlblogcasts.com/blogs/sqldbatips/archive/2008/08/14/sql-2008-install-blocked-on-express-tools-but-actually-due-to-sql-prompt.aspx

    http://www.red-gate.com/products/SQL_Prompt/index.htm    Products out from MS?

  78. Chad says:

    I have a question about VS 2008 SP1 and publishing an ASP.NET web site.  

    It used to allow you the option of having a merged single assembly, why has it been taken out?  I know you can do it through a web deployment project but how is this making any ones life easier?

    Is there some best practice being forced here?

    thanks

    Chad

  79. Hi Chad,

       AFAIK Publish Web did not allow merging of assemblies at all…  In Publish Web we just call aspnet_compiler.exe which does the pre-compilation…  It was always WDP which use to do the merging by calling aspnet_merge.exe…

        I am very curious to understand the potential impact and the features that you are seeing missing, could you send me an email at Vishal.Joshi@Microsoft.com to discuss this further…

    Thanks

    Vishal

  80. jb says:

    Somasegar,

    Is there any information on compatibility with 3.5 sp1 code deployed onto non-sp1 machines?  Specifically, what it will break?  I support apps for multiple clients and not all of them have upgraded to sp1 on their servers yet.  I want to upgrade to my local workstation & visual studio to sp1, but I don’t know how to support multiple sp1 targets.  

    Thanks,

    –jb

  81. Larry says:

    JB,

    Thanks for your post.  As for the compat question we worked hard to maintain a very high level of compat,ibility between 3.5 and 3.5 SP1.  We have received a small number of breaks, but we still believe that the release is very highly compatible.  As for those reports we will work hard to fix these compatibility issues for our customers when they arise.

    As for the targeting question I would encourage you to target the RTM release and unless you want to use some of the new features in the SP, otherwise targeting the 3.5 RTM will work fine on the SP.

    Thanks,

    Larry.

  82. Raspen says:

    You guys really ought to fix text rendering, datagridview, data binding and sluggish performance of GDI+ in general for WinForms.

    Why has this been ignored for so long? Why not accelerate it properly once and for all with those monster GPUs?

    Why is the footpring of WPF and Silverlight so huge that even pathetically slow WinForm outperforms it by a factor of 5?

    Why not fix the problems and actually invest in the tech you gave us before pushing another, even more bloated one?

    The benefits are so huge I cannot believe your strategy at all. Most drop-outs from evaluating all your new tech are related to performance and poor rendering against real-world, heavy-stress, heavy-updating scenarios for the UI.

    WPF and Silverlight make it much worse, despite being a great tech, they are unusable for snappy apps users, put simply, demand.

  83. Ian Ellison-Taylor [MSFT] says:

    Raspen, we always take performance very seriously and while there are inherent limits to how much we can improve GDI+ we’ll look in to what more can be done.

    I’m not exactly sure what you mean by “footprint” but WPF is significantly smaller and faster with SP1 and the Client Profile (thanks to increased hardware acceleration). Silverlight RC1 also has significant performance improvements that should be noticeable.

    If you wouldn’t mind sending me your scenarios in more detail I’ll look in to what the issues might be in more detail.

    Thanks,

    Ian.ellison-taylor@microsoft.com

  84. mizma2k says:

    Dear sir,

    if I reinstall windows xp and I want to use vs2008, I should  install .net framework 3.5 sp1 onlyor install 3.5 then 3.5 sp1.

    thanks for you answer.

  85. Somasegar says:

    Hi Mizma2K,

    If you install VS 2008 after you re-install Windows XP, you install .NET FX 3.5 as part of the VS install.  In that case, you need to install .NET FX 3.5 SP1 to get the latest framework bits.

    -somasegar

  86. George says:

    I can’t install this service pack and it has been killing my brain this for a week.

    The installer stops downloading and progressing and becomes unresponsive without any logs,errors or whatsoever.

    Please help :(

  87. Natalie [MSFT] says:

    [Responding to George’s post on Nov. 13]

    George, can you please provide contact information so we can connect directly? I’d like to help.

  88. I can’t install the service pack because the Removal tools of visual studio 2008 ask for a visual studio Media. I can’t continue and the tool rollback the installation.

    I’m very confused…

  89. MattKauf says:

    Hi Jordi. Can you provide contact information so we can follow up directly. Thanks!

  90. joedotnot says:

    I installed a clean version of Windows XP SP2 on VMWare. Followed by VS 2008 Express SP1 DVD, which i burned from the all-in-one download. I did not bother downloading the MSDN so there is NO local help; As per instructions, went to Tools -> Options -> Environment -> Help -> Online, and tried to change "Try online first, then local" and clicked OK.

    Problem is this does NOT stick, upon opening Tools/Options again, it was back to "Try local only, not online"!

    This problem occurred for C# Express, VB Express, Web Express. How pathetic i thought, considering a clean install.

    But i got around it to work by:

    – change it to "Try online first, then local"

    – DON’T click OK. Instead click on the ? mark icon (Top right hand corner beside the Close X box); Some other pop-up opens and choose Online etc.

    – NOW Click OK. This time it "Sticks"

  91. Abhjit says:

    Hi soma!!!

    In VS 08 SP1 a new frmwork called "Client Profile frmwork 3.5 sp1" has been provided.  can you help me how to provide this frmwork with deployment project(offline installation) or installables??

  92. Hi Abhjit,

    There’s one important caveat associated with offline installations of the .NET Framework 3.5 SP1 Client Profile. If the target machine does not support the Client Profile, either because it’s not an XP machine or because the machine already has a previous version of the Framework installed, the full .NET Framework 3.5 SP1 installer will be downloaded and executed instead.

    This means for offline scenarios you’ll potentially only gain on installation speed. If that suffices for you as a motivator, continue reading. If not, it might be easier just to roll out the full .NET Framework 3.5 SP1 installer as part of your package. The main scenario for Client Profile is fast web installs where we download while installing, etc.

    Now to the real stuff. Considering the primary goal of using the Client Profile for web deployment scenarios, Visual Studio 2008 SP1 comes with the "product definition" for an online Client Profile installation. See %ProgramFiles%microsoft sdksWindowsv6.0ABootstrapperPackagesDotNetFx35Client for this definition, which is where the Prerequisites dialog in Visual Studio 2008 SP1 gets its data from.

    All this product.xml file tells the bootstrapper is how the executable installer for the Client Profile is called (i.e. DotNetFx35ClientSetup.exe). During build time of your Setup and Deployment Project, that binary gets included in the offline package and copied from the aforementioned location. You can find this online package at http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=8cea6cd1-15bc-4664-b27d-8ceba808b28b&DisplayLang=en

    This explains how the online scenario is intended to work. However, as you want to go for an offline installation, you should grab the offline installer from http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=992cffcb-f8ce-41d9-8bd6-31f3e216285c&DisplayLang=en and place it in that folder.  You’ll have to rename it from DotNetFx35Client.exe to DotNetFx35ClientSetup.exe for Visual Studio to pick it up based on the product.xml file that points to it.

    Notice the file size of the offline package. This is the combined size of the installers for both the Client Profile, around 25 MB, and the full framework, around 230 MB. To be truly offline and for reasons explained at the beginning of this comment post, we have to include both in the offline package.

    Keep in mind this is merely a work-around as the Client Profile was primarily designed and tested for online scenarios. If you have further questions, feel free to contact me directly at bartde at microsoft dot com.

    Hope this helps,

    -Bart

  93. Is there some best practice being forced here?

    thanks

  94. MOOD says:

    THXXXXXXXXXXXX