From: Mike '/m' 


The program does not need to be .Net enabled.  However the program did its
task, it made you download .Net.

  /m

On Mon, 16 May 2005 19:22:56 -0400, "Gary Britt"
 wrote:

>Is it having .Net itself installed that is less secure, or is it the
>programs written for .Net?  Why is it less secure?  I avoided .Net on my
>machines until recently.  I went through the same crap you described when I
>installed it.  MS had a free keyboard layout designer/dll builder program I
>wanted to try, but it was .Net only.  Why a keyboard layout program needed
>to be network centric or whatever it is .Net does was a baffle to me.
>
>Gary
>
>"Geo"  wrote in message
news:42891e42$1{at}w3.nls.net...
>> "Richard B."  wrote in message
>> news:hn3i81h4om7tr8ut73datmb4babuodlui3{at}4ax.com...
>>
>> > I've had other software require it to be installed, some engineering
>> > software (Haested) did.
>>
>> I've so far avoided anything that required it, I don't see why I should
>have
>> to have a less secure system just to make it easier for a programmer to
>> write a program. I intend to continue to resist anything .NET..
>>
>> Geo.
>>
>>
>

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5