3 Replies Latest reply on May 29, 2011 2:42 PM by

    .net needed for XP drivers?  Is this normal?



      Is it a new thing now where .Net is needed for XP drivers to funtion? Drivers used to be little downloads keyed to specific hardware.  This computer (Q45 chipset with E8400 processor and embedded graphics(Dell Optiplex 960)) requires a giant (50mb) download along with .Net3 for video and .Net 1.1 for a PCI serial device. Initial overhead and all the updates to all the versions of .Net seem a lot different from before.  Is this the way things are going?




        • 1. Re: .net needed for XP drivers?  Is this normal?

          I feel you, I had to install .NET 2.0 solely for  the "Intel SSD Toolbox" to work.

          That's about 300 mb of bloat (with all the security fixes) only to be able to use trim once in a while (I'm on XP too).

          The Intel SSD Toolbox itself is a 4 megs application...

          Totally ridiculous if you ask me :/

          • 2. Re: .net needed for XP drivers?  Is this normal?

            The situation is growing worse.  The new integrated graphics "driver"  package alone wastes hundreds of megabytes of disk space with all of  the unnecessary application (not to mention language resource) files,  and on top of that wants me to install the latest .NET Framework, which  would probably add at least another gigabyte when subsequent security  updates are taken into account.  It would be great if the *only*  consequence were wasted disk space, but installing .NET makes a lot of  fundamental changes to the operating system itself, which to me are  undesirable.


            I really wish Intel (and all hardware manufacturers) would  release separate driver-only packages for all devices, or at least  maintain the drivers in a setup (*.inf) file apart from the optional  accessories/applications.  Thank you in advance for taking our complaints seriously Intel.

            • 3. Re: .net needed for XP drivers?  Is this normal?

              Ever installed ATI video drivers?


              .net is needed there since 2006 - different versions...


              although having to install .net before u can install graphics drivers may not be comfortable its perfectly normal for the windows platform.


              If u dont want that hassle choose a better OS with a real package Manager that automatically solves all dependencis and uses unified updating services for all your software. Yeah sounds pretty futuristic eh, not having to run all these update services of different vendors but one for all? Actually its cheap and pretty convenient. and yes, the intel drivers for that platform are very good indeed (Debian/ubuntu eh)