Why .NET Upgrades Are Important (and so fast)

The Upgrade Cycle: Fast, But Intentional

At the beginning of the video, Tim points out that the latest version of .NET—currently .NET 9—is a short-term support (STS) version. Every two years, Microsoft releases a long-term support (LTS) version, like .NET 8, which stays supported for three years. In between LTS releases, you get STS versions, each supported for 18 months.

This cycle of in-place updates allows companies to always stay on a supported version, ensuring their applications don’t get stuck using earlier versions of the framework that are no longer supported.

Why Long Gaps Between Updates Hurt

Tim explains that many companies resist updating because they hope for longer support cycles—like 10 years. But that delay leads to bigger problems. As Tim notes, trying to update .NET Framework from something like version 3.5 to version 4.8 results in overwhelming feature gaps and compatibility issues.

Many legacy applications built years ago are still running on earlier versions like .NET Framework 3.5 or 4.0. Tim has seen this firsthand when consulting with businesses. These versions are still displayed in production environments even though they’re outdated. For these companies, installing the latest version feels like an expensive, disruptive task.

Tim equates the upgrade gap to trying to leap from the first floor of a house to the second—it's theoretically possible but highly impractical. That kind of upgrade leap often results in applications breaking, files conflicting, and developers getting stuck.

Take Smaller Steps Instead of One Giant Leap

To address the problem, Tim introduces a metaphor: instead of a single leap between specific versions, take a series of smaller steps—like climbing stairs. If each step involves a smaller set of changes, then upgrading becomes far more realistic for development teams.

Rather than waiting five or ten years and then facing an overwhelming upgrade, it's better to plan small, regular upgrades. Each minor version may require some effort, but it avoids the chaos of overhauling your programs and tools all at once.

Tim says this step-by-step method also works better with operating systems like Windows, where skipping too many windows updates or missing updates can cause system conflicts. He’s seen many companies fall into the trap of "wait and update later," only to be prompted by broken systems and costly downtime.

Skipping Versions? Here’s Why That’s a Trap

Some companies think they’ll save time and energy by only upgrading every 4 or 5 years. Tim warns against this. Not only does skipping versions increase complexity, but it also often forces teams to deal with system file checker errors, unsupported APIs, or uninstall and repair processes to recover from compatibility failures.

The command prompt metaphor Tim uses—attempting to skip too many steps—is clever. Just as you wouldn’t run a complex command in a shell without checking the context, you shouldn’t skip multiple versions of .NET without understanding the cost. If you're using Visual Studio and try targeting a newer framework without upgrading properly, you're bound to face issues.

The Unavoidable Base Cost of Upgrading

Tim introduces the idea of a "base cost"—a certain level of effort required for any upgrade, regardless of how frequently you do it. Even if you upgrade every year, you’ll still need to:

• Validate the installation

• Test applications using QA

• Check system files

• Review third-party packages

• Ensure that more options are still compatible

Whether you're upgrading annually or once a decade, these costs—checking endpoints, running integration tests, and reviewing services—don’t disappear.

Automation Makes the Upgrade Process Easier

To reduce that base cost, Tim strongly recommends investing in automation. With proper tools like CI/CD pipelines, automated tests, and monitored installation processes, the burden of validation shrinks.

The advice is simple: automate as much as you can. That way, when it’s time to upgrade, you won’t need to spend months verifying the features or running regression tests manually.

For example, instead of manually running your applications to see if they still work, automated test coverage can tell you immediately if something’s broken. It also helps if your team uses Visual Studio to build and test new versions, as integrated tools there support seamless upgrades.

Frequent Upgrades Build Developer Confidence

Tim compares .NET upgrades to deploying code: the more frequently you do it, the easier it becomes. You might not want to deploy on a Friday—but if your systems are robust, automated, and well-tested, you can.

The same goes for the .NET framework. Once you've practiced regular upgrades, you're less likely to run into issues when the operating system or framework is updated. You won't have to search for outdated files or run repair utilities every time. Instead, you build a habit and confidence over time.

Start With What You Have—And Improve From There

Even if your current version of the .NET framework is years old, Tim suggests starting now. Begin by writing unit tests as you fix bugs. Over time, these tests will help validate that your upgrade is stable.

Even if the initial upgrade takes significant effort, future upgrades will become easier. The process of moving from version 1 to 2 might be hard, but from 2 to 3, 3 to 4, and so on—it gets smoother. You’ll spend less time checking for missing updates or trying to install packages that no longer work.

Skipping Upgrades Means Losing Performance

Tim points out a powerful motivator to upgrade: performance. Each new version of .NET brings enhancements that can make your applications run faster. He mentions that just moving to .NET 9 results in improved speed and reduced cloud costs—with no code changes required.

For companies running on the Windows operating system, this means better resource usage, faster response times, and a better experience for end-users. If you’re managing legacy applications and trying to stretch their life, performance can become a hidden cost if you're not up to date.

Real Example: Tim’s Experience with the Suggest Site

To show how easy the process can become, Tim shares his experience with upgrading his Suggest site. Initially built on .NET 6, it has been updated to each new version with minimal effort. Sometimes, all he had to do was change the version number.

While the app isn’t trivial—it depends on NuGet packages and external systems—the upgrades have remained smooth, proving that frequent upgrades reduce friction.

Final Thoughts: How to Prepare for Long-Term Success

Tim wraps up by emphasizing that staying on current versions keeps your company competitive and relevant. If you get stuck on outdated frameworks, you’ll find fewer third-party integrations, limited support, and reduced developer interest.

He encourages developers to use every version upgrade as an opportunity to improve automation and testing. With each release, you increase support, security, and system performance.

Conclusion:

Tim Corey in his video, offers a realistic, experience-based guide to understanding why upgrading .NET framework frequently is both achievable and essential. Instead of fearing the upgrade cycle, teams should focus on building automation, writing tests, and taking smaller, manageable steps. This approach doesn't just help with .NET—it helps with all applications and services on your computer or OS.

By preparing today, you create a better tomorrow for your team, your business, and your software. Do check out Tim's YouTube Channel for more Insights.