Server Fault is a question and answer site for system and network administrators. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

The powers that be would like to know a good business reason to upgrade 2500 desktops to .NET 4.0.

What are good business reasons for doing so?

share|improve this question

migrated from Sep 10 '09 at 14:08

This question came from our site for professional and enthusiast programmers.

I guess beta-testing for Microsoft :P – Andrei Rinea Sep 10 '09 at 14:04
I'm still trying to upgrade to 3.5 – recursive Sep 10 '09 at 14:10
@recursive: trying? Having problems? – Robert Koritnik Sep 10 '09 at 14:15
You'd have to explain your business. If your business is delivering COBOL applications, I doubt there's much value, for example. – John Zwinck Nov 15 '09 at 0:56

10 Answers 10

If you can't provide a reason and have to ask for one here, it is a good sign you don't have a business case to upgrade and your management is right.

share|improve this answer
We ahd the situation where developers moved from VS 2005 to VS 2008 and realised later that .Net 3.5 wasn't installed on all desktops. Then they upgraded to VS 2008 SP1 and had to wait for .Net 3.5 Sp1 to be deployed. Soon they'll get VS 2010, so I was just trying to be proactive and get plans for a 4.0 deployment. It will have to be done sooner or later. – Graeme Sep 11 '09 at 6:39
The Visual Studio installer (and service packs) include the correct version of the .NET framework. – jrummell Apr 20 '10 at 15:58

The benefit of using C# 4.0? Developer Productivity.

End users wouldn't be able to tell the difference between any of the other versions of the framework. So it's unlikely they would with this one.

BUT there are a heap of benefits for developers: New Features in C# 4.0

share|improve this answer
Hmm... I'm not sure I'd say "heaps". Unless you happen to be working with COM or dynamic languages, there's really just generic variance for delegates and interfaces, and named arguments/optional parameters. Not nearly as big a set of changes as for C# 2 or C# 3. Note that using C# 4 doesn't require .NET 4, if you stay away from dynamic typing and the new COM features... – Jon Skeet Sep 10 '09 at 14:07
As someone else said - there's MVC2 EF2, presumably fixes and other improvements too. But I guess the main reason is - if we don't do it sooner, we'll do it later. Though I suppose we could save ourselves the cost and jump straight to if there are more compelling reasons. – Graeme Sep 10 '09 at 14:23

I guess paid beta-testing for Microsoft :P

share|improve this answer

Why do you want to roll out .NET 4? That's probably a good start for building a business case.

share|improve this answer

The only reason I know if is increased productivity. So far, each version of the framework has offered tools that allow me to get projects done more quickly, saving the company money.

So, if you are familiar with the new features, and can see how they would boost productivity or offer some other business advantage, that's your answer. If you can't, then management is right.

share|improve this answer
But I'd be shooting myself in the foot if I told my boss "install this and we'll be so much more productive" ;-) – Graeme Sep 10 '09 at 14:25

You only need to install this if and when any apps come along that are built on the 4.0 framework. And as far as I can tell, there are none. I wouldn't even start to consider installing the framework until VS 2010 and Office 2010 come out.

share|improve this answer

The only good reason is if your company uses desktop applications that require .NET 4.0, and it will probably be a while before that is the case.

share|improve this answer

In the short term, there is quite likely to be no good business reason to move, unless the business has an actual requirement that can only be satisfied with the new version.

In the long term, skill, support, and functionality issues are likely to dictate a jump to a new version of a platform at some point.

The question is how often should you jump. Generally, the business will (and IMO should) lag at least one or two versions behind the "latest and greatest". This is because hard work pays off eventually, but laziness pays off now :-)

share|improve this answer

Visual Studio 2010, Entity Framework 2, MVC 2, etc...
Mostly all about developer environment.

share|improve this answer

I generally wait until an image refresh cycle comes around and then put all current versions of the framework on the new image at that time (in addition to standard stuff like getting latest AV defs and auto updates included in the image, so it's not hit by a huge download and install when it's first used).

There's been a few requirements for specific versions here, and it's been nice to be able to say "yeah, we're good for that" rather than having to devise a deployment methodology in a tight timeframe.

share|improve this answer

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.