When choosing the .Net template, IA selected to include the MSI engine 3.0 by default, after going to the Microsoft site, I notice that they recommend using the 3.1.
My question is, it there any particular reason why IA chooses 3.0 instead of 3.1?
Also, could anyone tell me if I have to distribute the MSI engine 3.X at all? Doesn’t the Microsoft XP OS (no service packs) include the 3.X engine as part of the OS? Should I just include the MSI 2.0 for my Win 9X installation since its possible that those OSs don’t have the MSI engine?
Thanks.
MSI Engines
-
- Posts: 3452
- Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 7:17 pm
- Contact:
Hi Rene
MSI 3.0 is the MSI version that is required for installing .NET 2.0 on Windows operating systems. MSI 3.1 is not required. This information is also available on the Microsoft web site, in the section explaining .NET 2.0's system requirements.
Windows XP without service packs does not include MSI 3.0. In addition, the InstallAware runtime installer is smart enough and automatically installs 2.0 on Win9X platforms for you, without you manually selecting 2.0 on the runtimes view.
The application runtimes view is really smart and works well as designed. I understand you are a bit suspicious and have a habit of double-checking things...
...so let me tell you of another advantage that you get by using the Application Runtimes view:
1) When you do web builds, your main installer won't include any of these runtimes bundled with it, and download them from the web only when needed. It will however contain the application itself so your setup will run without mandating an Internet connection, as long as the runtimes are found.
2) When you do a single file build, your main installer will contain everything, inside a monolithic file. You may have your reasons for taking this route, but we generally recommend web builds.
3) And finally a CD build stores everything in multiple directories, in uncompressed form.
All of this happens from a single source - you don't have to manually change your code, just choose your build type (or even do multiple builds in a single pass).
And of course, in compressed builds, you get the advantage of better compression, at absolutely no effort to you!
Finally:
a) The Application Runtimes view is end-user extensible, this whitepaper describes how:
http://www.installaware.com/installawar ... s_view.pdf
b) Application Runtimes which have dependencies automatically select them when they are chosen for an install
c) Your own elements added to this view can build on top of the existing dependencies and - for free - leverage all the installation logic, code, data, and better compression of their own nested runtimes
Hope that satisfies your curiosity!
MSI 3.0 is the MSI version that is required for installing .NET 2.0 on Windows operating systems. MSI 3.1 is not required. This information is also available on the Microsoft web site, in the section explaining .NET 2.0's system requirements.
Windows XP without service packs does not include MSI 3.0. In addition, the InstallAware runtime installer is smart enough and automatically installs 2.0 on Win9X platforms for you, without you manually selecting 2.0 on the runtimes view.
The application runtimes view is really smart and works well as designed. I understand you are a bit suspicious and have a habit of double-checking things...
...so let me tell you of another advantage that you get by using the Application Runtimes view:
1) When you do web builds, your main installer won't include any of these runtimes bundled with it, and download them from the web only when needed. It will however contain the application itself so your setup will run without mandating an Internet connection, as long as the runtimes are found.
2) When you do a single file build, your main installer will contain everything, inside a monolithic file. You may have your reasons for taking this route, but we generally recommend web builds.
3) And finally a CD build stores everything in multiple directories, in uncompressed form.
All of this happens from a single source - you don't have to manually change your code, just choose your build type (or even do multiple builds in a single pass).
And of course, in compressed builds, you get the advantage of better compression, at absolutely no effort to you!
Finally:
a) The Application Runtimes view is end-user extensible, this whitepaper describes how:
http://www.installaware.com/installawar ... s_view.pdf
b) Application Runtimes which have dependencies automatically select them when they are chosen for an install
c) Your own elements added to this view can build on top of the existing dependencies and - for free - leverage all the installation logic, code, data, and better compression of their own nested runtimes
Hope that satisfies your curiosity!
Michael Nesmith
InstallAware
Home of The Next Generation MSI Installer
Get your free copy today - http://www.installaware.com/
InstallAware
Home of The Next Generation MSI Installer
Get your free copy today - http://www.installaware.com/
Hey Michael, do you ever take a break??
I think I am going to limit my post to 8 am to 5 pm so I don't bother you guys at odds times of the day!!
Per the microsoft website (http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=0856eacb-4362-4b0d-8edd-aab15c5e04f5&DisplayLang=enhttp://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=0856eacb-4362-4b0d-8edd-aab15c5e04f5&DisplayLang=en)
------------------------------------
Required Software:
Windows Installer 3.0 (except for Windows 98/ME, which require Windows Installer 2.0 or later). Windows Installer 3.1 or later is recommended.
------------------------------------
I see your point about the 3.1 not being required by .Net 2.0 but Microsoft says that they recommend using 3.1, I have no idea why but shouldn’t I just add the 3.1 instead of the 3.0? I can't go wrong this way right? Or is the 30 a more proven MSI engine?
Sorry for bugging you guys so much!

MichaelNesmith wrote:MSI 3.0 is the MSI version that is required for installing .NET 2.0 on Windows operating systems. MSI 3.1 is not required.
Per the microsoft website (http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=0856eacb-4362-4b0d-8edd-aab15c5e04f5&DisplayLang=enhttp://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=0856eacb-4362-4b0d-8edd-aab15c5e04f5&DisplayLang=en)
------------------------------------
Required Software:
Windows Installer 3.0 (except for Windows 98/ME, which require Windows Installer 2.0 or later). Windows Installer 3.1 or later is recommended.
------------------------------------
I see your point about the 3.1 not being required by .Net 2.0 but Microsoft says that they recommend using 3.1, I have no idea why but shouldn’t I just add the 3.1 instead of the 3.0? I can't go wrong this way right? Or is the 30 a more proven MSI engine?
Sorry for bugging you guys so much!
-
- Posts: 3452
- Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 7:17 pm
- Contact:
Hi Rene!
No problem at all! We are here to help. In fact, we are happy to call you as well, to help alleviate your concerns. Please feel free to leave your number and a good time to call in a private message, so we can answer all of your questions to your satisfaction!
No problem at all! We are here to help. In fact, we are happy to call you as well, to help alleviate your concerns. Please feel free to leave your number and a good time to call in a private message, so we can answer all of your questions to your satisfaction!
Michael Nesmith
InstallAware
Home of The Next Generation MSI Installer
Get your free copy today - http://www.installaware.com/
InstallAware
Home of The Next Generation MSI Installer
Get your free copy today - http://www.installaware.com/
This link gives some more info regarding what MSI versions are distributed with what OS versions.
Released Versions of Windows Installer
Hope it helps other people too.
Released Versions of Windows Installer
Hope it helps other people too.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 175 guests