When installing EasyBCD on brandew Vista SP1 (that does not have .NET 2.0 installed yet), installation is not possible. Installer starts and (if there is an active internet connection) at a certain point, about 48MB data are downloaded, and when finished, the message: ".NET 2.0 could not be installed" is given out - and that was it. There is no possibility to intervene (to cancel installation and first manually install .NET).
EasyBCD installation fail on brandnew Vista
- Thread starter ProloSozz
- Start date
D
devans
Guest
Have you run windows update and gotten all of the downloads and installed them, then rebooted?
Thanks
Thanks
Sorry to bother you – but:
1. whether .NET 2.0 is already installed or not is not the main problem here!
– the main problem here is that
a) .NET is downloaded without warning and without possibility to cancel EBCD-Installation and manually install .NET first
b) the downloaded 48MB were downloaded for nothing as can't be installed!
2) NO, I did not install ANY of the OS-downloads as this was a test-installation for some special purposes.
But in that case: EBCD should not install (or allow canceling) if certain necessary updates were not yed installed and warn about it!
Btw: as it was a test installation along with another OS on the same HD, I could install it in the other OS; but that's not the solution to the issue!
1. whether .NET 2.0 is already installed or not is not the main problem here!
– the main problem here is that
a) .NET is downloaded without warning and without possibility to cancel EBCD-Installation and manually install .NET first
b) the downloaded 48MB were downloaded for nothing as can't be installed!
2) NO, I did not install ANY of the OS-downloads as this was a test-installation for some special purposes.
But in that case: EBCD should not install (or allow canceling) if certain necessary updates were not yed installed and warn about it!
Btw: as it was a test installation along with another OS on the same HD, I could install it in the other OS; but that's not the solution to the issue!
The only I can think of off the top of my head is that .net 2.0 installation may be balking if .net 3 is already activated in "Turn Windows Features On and Off". You can reach that through Installed Updates (look at the left side), or go to Start and simply type in the StartSearch box 'optionalfeatures' minus the '' of course, it should appear above.
Also you really should install SP2 before doing anything else. Tip for that is to disable any antimalware protection first, as that always stops it installing.
Addendum
I didn't say if .net 2 was already installed but .net 3, yes I agree the installer shouldn't have failed and told you so to give a choice of cancelling. Wait until someone else spots this who know the product better than I.
Also you really should install SP2 before doing anything else. Tip for that is to disable any antimalware protection first, as that always stops it installing.
Addendum
I didn't say if .net 2 was already installed but .net 3, yes I agree the installer shouldn't have failed and told you so to give a choice of cancelling. Wait until someone else spots this who know the product better than I.
Last edited:
Actually Dick is right, you're missing the .NET service pack.
Sorry, you are not coming to the point of the complaint why I had opened the thread here!
My complaint is still: you are NEITHER asked NOR warned that about 50MB data are going to be downoaded from the internet for totally useless purpose and for absolutely nothing – and you cannot stop it or do anything else.
That way of installation is a total failure as you even are not told that .NET must be installed first and you don't get the opportunity to install it first and that it will not be installed even if it is downloaded and you have to pay for 50MB of data for nothing.
Again: my complaint is NOT that .NET has to be installed, or that it has do be installed first. MY COMPLAINT IS THAT THERE IS NO WARNING THAT INSTALLATION WILL FAIL AND YOU DON'T GET A CHANCE TO AVOID THAT!!!
My complaint is still: you are NEITHER asked NOR warned that about 50MB data are going to be downoaded from the internet for totally useless purpose and for absolutely nothing – and you cannot stop it or do anything else.
That way of installation is a total failure as you even are not told that .NET must be installed first and you don't get the opportunity to install it first and that it will not be installed even if it is downloaded and you have to pay for 50MB of data for nothing.
Again: my complaint is NOT that .NET has to be installed, or that it has do be installed first. MY COMPLAINT IS THAT THERE IS NO WARNING THAT INSTALLATION WILL FAIL AND YOU DON'T GET A CHANCE TO AVOID THAT!!!
Sorry to burst your bubble, but there is reported documentation that states EasyBCD requires ,NET 2.0 that I found within 2 clicks of the EasyBCD page. So your failure to read the User Guide or the FAQ, is not the fault of anyone here. Cause from the User Guide to the FAQ you get the System Requirements. Which clearly state:
EasyBCD doesn't require too much to get everything up and running:
•An IBM-Compatible PC, supporting both 32- and 64-bit machines
•Windows 8, 7, or Vista installed on the same machine (but you can use it from within XP, too!)
•Microsoft .NET 2.0+ Framework (automatically installed during setup)
Looks to me like it clearly says that it has to be installed and that it will be downloaded. You failed to read everything and be prepared. That is not the fault of anyone on the site or anything with the program. Windows, Linux nor any other program warn you. Don't complain about a free program when it gets the job you want done. Especially when you don't read first!
EasyBCD doesn't require too much to get everything up and running:
•An IBM-Compatible PC, supporting both 32- and 64-bit machines
•Windows 8, 7, or Vista installed on the same machine (but you can use it from within XP, too!)
•Microsoft .NET 2.0+ Framework (automatically installed during setup)
Looks to me like it clearly says that it has to be installed and that it will be downloaded. You failed to read everything and be prepared. That is not the fault of anyone on the site or anything with the program. Windows, Linux nor any other program warn you. Don't complain about a free program when it gets the job you want done. Especially when you don't read first!
Sorry to burst your bubble, but it's just not true what you are writing!
(sorry to steal your words, but they are as (or even more) applicable as in your post!)
You are right concerning what is written in the manual and the system requirements – but if you respect all that you run into the issue I describe here, and THAT'S THE ISSUE HERE!!!
THE INSTALLER IS NOT WORKING AS IT SHOULD!!
a) did I read AND follow the user guide AND the FAQ, and
b) is the fault inside the non-working installer – and that's the domain of the programmer!
As I told you: all of that is fulfilled!!! But AUTOMATIC INSTALLATION DURING SETUP IS NOT WORKING and THAT'S THE ISSUE HERE!!
And it would be kind to let the user to have the choice to cancel installation BEFORE .NET IS DOWNLOADED AND (NOT) INSTALLED to first install it manually – and I even would suggest to check for presence of .NET 2.0 BEFORE the installation itself starts; so the installer should first check whether .NET 2.0 is installed or not – if not the user get's the choice to a) quit and install it separately or b) let the EBCD-installer install it from within the EBCD-installer!
It does not get less wrong if you again and again allege me not to have followed the manual! I did, and I respected all system requirements – BUT ANYWAY IT IS NOT INSTALLING AS IT SHOULD!
AND THAT'S THE ISSUE HERE!
Addendum:
Next problem: if you install EasyBCD on a brandnew Vista without internet-connection, you get the error that .NET could not be retrieved and you can chose whether to retry or to cancel the installation. When canceling the partial installation is just left in pieces, the already insalled files are neither deinstalled, nor is there a possibility to deinstall the partially installed pieces.
If you rerun the installer (still without internet connection) you even don't get the choice to retry or cancel – it is just canceled directly.
BTW: the exact error after the canceling of .NET 2.0 (when having the internet connection) comes from the .NET 2.0 SP2 installer:
This computer does not meet the minimal system requirements to install the software. These requirements must be fulfilled before Microsoft .NET Framework 2.0 SP2 can be installed: Requirements: Microsoft .NET Framework 2.0 SP1 THIS PRODUCT IS NOT SUPPORTED BY VISTA OPERATING SYSTEMS!
So the thing is: your software is retrieving .NET 2.0 SP2 – ignoring that .NET 2.0 SP1 is not yet installed – but for installing .NET 2.0 SP2 first .NET 2.0 SP1 is required; and in your manual is written that .NET would be installed automatically.
(sorry to steal your words, but they are as (or even more) applicable as in your post!)
You are right concerning what is written in the manual and the system requirements – but if you respect all that you run into the issue I describe here, and THAT'S THE ISSUE HERE!!!
THE INSTALLER IS NOT WORKING AS IT SHOULD!!
So what? It is also written that it will be installed automatically in case it is not yet installed – but that automatic installation IS NOT WORKING as it should. That's the issue here!
Just double wrong!
a) did I read AND follow the user guide AND the FAQ, and
b) is the fault inside the non-working installer – and that's the domain of the programmer!
As I told you: all of that is fulfilled!!! But AUTOMATIC INSTALLATION DURING SETUP IS NOT WORKING and THAT'S THE ISSUE HERE!!
Again: IT IS DOWNLOADED but CANNOT BE INSTALLED. And that's the issue here!
NO I DID NOT! BUT THE INSTALLER IS NOT WORKING AS IT SHOULD and AS IT IS WRITTEN IN THE MANUAL!
WRONG! It is in the responsibility of the programmers to make the program do exactly THAT what is written in the manual.
And it would be kind to let the user to have the choice to cancel installation BEFORE .NET IS DOWNLOADED AND (NOT) INSTALLED to first install it manually – and I even would suggest to check for presence of .NET 2.0 BEFORE the installation itself starts; so the installer should first check whether .NET 2.0 is installed or not – if not the user get's the choice to a) quit and install it separately or b) let the EBCD-installer install it from within the EBCD-installer!
It does not get less wrong if you again and again allege me not to have followed the manual! I did, and I respected all system requirements – BUT ANYWAY IT IS NOT INSTALLING AS IT SHOULD!
AND THAT'S THE ISSUE HERE!
Addendum:
Next problem: if you install EasyBCD on a brandnew Vista without internet-connection, you get the error that .NET could not be retrieved and you can chose whether to retry or to cancel the installation. When canceling the partial installation is just left in pieces, the already insalled files are neither deinstalled, nor is there a possibility to deinstall the partially installed pieces.
If you rerun the installer (still without internet connection) you even don't get the choice to retry or cancel – it is just canceled directly.
BTW: the exact error after the canceling of .NET 2.0 (when having the internet connection) comes from the .NET 2.0 SP2 installer:
This computer does not meet the minimal system requirements to install the software. These requirements must be fulfilled before Microsoft .NET Framework 2.0 SP2 can be installed: Requirements: Microsoft .NET Framework 2.0 SP1 THIS PRODUCT IS NOT SUPPORTED BY VISTA OPERATING SYSTEMS!
So the thing is: your software is retrieving .NET 2.0 SP2 – ignoring that .NET 2.0 SP1 is not yet installed – but for installing .NET 2.0 SP2 first .NET 2.0 SP1 is required; and in your manual is written that .NET would be installed automatically.
Last edited:
Yes, you are right. EasyBCD does not download the correct file on Windows Vista as .NET 2.0 *is* installed but not at the correct service pack level. The only solution is to download .NET 3.5 instead.
This is something we'll look into fixing, but there is no need to be so angry.
This is something we'll look into fixing, but there is no need to be so angry.
But also here is the question: is it really necessary to download it directly – or wouldn't it be better to tell the user to install it first? Maybe he has the installer on his harddisk or on a CD, but not yet installed, or he has an expensive internet connection and can get it from elsewhere.
Thanks for looing at it – and sorry for my shouting; but I do not appreciate being told to not have consulted the manual if there is a reproduceable issue not covered by the manual.
Previously, EasyBCD took no action with regard to .NET, and told the user (via the documentation) to ensure that it was installed on XP at the appropriate level before trying to use EasyBCD.
After the ten thousanth "This doesn't work on XP" post, CG implemented the check and auto-install as a user service and in consideration of the sanity of the mods in having to repeat politely the instruction to RTFM.
This was never a problem on any other OS at that time, but as .NET levels keep coming and superseding others and new OSs appear with bits missing the situation gets more complex.
I'm sure CG will sort it for you, but bear in mind that you are the first poster ever to make a complaint in direct opposition to the countless others mentioned above, so just going back to telling the user to take manual action, from bitter experience, is not the solution.
After the ten thousanth "This doesn't work on XP" post, CG implemented the check and auto-install as a user service and in consideration of the sanity of the mods in having to repeat politely the instruction to RTFM.
This was never a problem on any other OS at that time, but as .NET levels keep coming and superseding others and new OSs appear with bits missing the situation gets more complex.
I'm sure CG will sort it for you, but bear in mind that you are the first poster ever to make a complaint in direct opposition to the countless others mentioned above, so just going back to telling the user to take manual action, from bitter experience, is not the solution.
Surely not – but that's not what I would expect; what I propose would be as simple as the following:
– user downloads EasyBCD-installer
– user starts the installer
–> the installer will first check whether the necessary .NET is installed or not
––> if yes, the installer can install EasyBCD and that was it – the user does not have to do anything else ...
––> if no, the user gets informed (.NET 2.0 not found – what to do?) and can choose
–––> whether to quit and install .NET by himself – the user has to be told what he would have to install exaclty (exact version etc.)
=> program quits and does not install anything at all (even not some program pieces)
–––> or the user lets the EasyBCD-installer download and install .NET (and of course that should not be the wrong version ...)
=> program downloads and installs .NET first (and stops in case there is some problem with downloading or installing .NET) – and if that is done, it restarts with the EasyBCD-installer (again whith the .NET-check to be on the safe side – and then of course the question would not come again as .NET 2.0 should be installed now).
–––> third option could be to ignore the warning (of missing .NET) and install EasyBCD anyway; but i don't know whether that's so useful – maybe .NET is installed and not recognized; and if that third option would not be there, EasyBCD could not be installed even if it would run (to avoid that people shout: "that software is not installable")
I don't think that this would be too complicated or cause too much troubles for the user
Btw: as for now, first EasyBCD is installed, and afterwards .NET downloaded – what results in the problem that EasyBCD was not completely installed and therefore also is not uninstallable as important pieces are missing (uninstaller entry in program list of system etc.).
Last edited: