|
 |
aspx thread: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
Message #1 by "Quinton James Sheppard" <quintons@k...> on Thu, 1 Nov 2001 11:50:42
|
|
I have been hearing alot of praise for the .NET arcutecture, but is it
really worth the effort in going to the trouble of learning .NET? I am
developing a knowledge base reasearch web site but have not as yet got to
the server side programming.
What I would like to know is:
1) what advantages does it have over previouse ASP development.
2) is it relativly easy to migrate from ASP 2/3 to ASP.NET?
3) and as the framework is still in it's Beta stage, would I be running
before I can walk in respect to the technology.
Many thanks,
Quinton.
Message #2 by "Mitch Denny" <mitch.denny@w...> on Thu, 1 Nov 2001 22:23:25 +1000
|
|
Quinton,
Given the nature of your site I am surprise that you
haven't hit on a requirement to use some server-side
programming.
.NET is relitively easy to learn, and free and useful
support from other developers is very easy to obtain
from list servers like this ones and others:
http://www.aspfriends.com
http://discuss.develop.com/dotnet.html
To answer your specific questions:
1. ASP.NET development is much more structured especially
if you embrace content, code and layout seperation.
2. It depends almost 100% on the existing code. To really
leverage the features of .NET you are going to need to
touch most of your code to make it type safe and use
the new data access features. But if you haven't
hit server-side coding yet I guess you might not have
to do anything.
3. Install it now, its stable and reliable, and will
be released to manufacturing very shortly.
Hope this helps.
----------------------------------------
- Mitch Denny
- http://www.warbyte.com
- mitch.denny@w...
- +61 (414) 610-141
-
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Quinton James Sheppard [mailto:quintons@k...]
> Sent: Thursday, 1 November 2001 11:51 AM
> To: ASP+
> Subject: [aspx] to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
>
>
> I have been hearing alot of praise for the .NET arcutecture,
> but is it
> really worth the effort in going to the trouble of learning
> .NET? I am
> developing a knowledge base reasearch web site but have not
> as yet got to
> the server side programming.
>
> What I would like to know is:
> 1) what advantages does it have over previouse ASP development.
> 2) is it relativly easy to migrate from ASP 2/3 to ASP.NET?
> 3) and as the framework is still in it's Beta stage, would I
> be running
> before I can walk in respect to the technology.
>
> Many thanks,
> Quinton.
>
Message #3 by Quinton Sheppard <quintons@k...> on Thu, 1 Nov 2001 14:47:28 -0000
|
|
Mitch,
Thanks for your comments. I will have to use server side programming (hence
a need for a database), and have programmed in ASP 2.0 and VB5 COM. This I
hope will help me in understanding ASP.NET.
Is there a book that you would recommend to me in learning ASP.NET? I am
thinking of getting the Wrox press book on ASP.NET but unsure if it will be
a good book to learn from and use as a reference.
Quinton.
-----Original Message-----
From: Mitch Denny [mailto:mitch.denny@w...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 12:23 PM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] RE: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
Quinton,
Given the nature of your site I am surprise that you
haven't hit on a requirement to use some server-side
programming.
.NET is relitively easy to learn, and free and useful
support from other developers is very easy to obtain
from list servers like this ones and others:
http://www.aspfriends.com
http://discuss.develop.com/dotnet.html
To answer your specific questions:
1. ASP.NET development is much more structured especially
if you embrace content, code and layout seperation.
2. It depends almost 100% on the existing code. To really
leverage the features of .NET you are going to need to
touch most of your code to make it type safe and use
the new data access features. But if you haven't
hit server-side coding yet I guess you might not have
to do anything.
3. Install it now, its stable and reliable, and will
be released to manufacturing very shortly.
Hope this helps.
----------------------------------------
- Mitch Denny
- http://www.warbyte.com
- mitch.denny@w...
- +61 (414) 610-141
-
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Quinton James Sheppard [mailto:quintons@k...]
> Sent: Thursday, 1 November 2001 11:51 AM
> To: ASP+
> Subject: [aspx] to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
>
>
> I have been hearing alot of praise for the .NET arcutecture,
> but is it
> really worth the effort in going to the trouble of learning
> .NET? I am
> developing a knowledge base reasearch web site but have not
> as yet got to
> the server side programming.
>
> What I would like to know is:
> 1) what advantages does it have over previouse ASP development.
> 2) is it relativly easy to migrate from ASP 2/3 to ASP.NET?
> 3) and as the framework is still in it's Beta stage, would I
> be running
> before I can walk in respect to the technology.
>
> Many thanks,
> Quinton.
>
Message #4 by "Luis Abreu" <luisabreu@n...> on Thu, 1 Nov 2001 13:47:36 -0000
|
|
Professional ASP.Net is a good book (at least to me, that is).
Regards,
Luis Abreu
http://www.luisabreu.go.cc/
mailto:luisabreu@n...
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Quinton Sheppard [mailto:quintons@k...]
> Sent: quinta-feira, 1 de Novembro de 2001 14:47
> To: ASP+
> Subject: [aspx] RE: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
>
> Mitch,
>
> Thanks for your comments. I will have to use server side programming
> (hence
> a need for a database), and have programmed in ASP 2.0 and VB5 COM.
This I
> hope will help me in understanding ASP.NET.
>
> Is there a book that you would recommend to me in learning ASP.NET? I
am
> thinking of getting the Wrox press book on ASP.NET but unsure if it
will
> be
> a good book to learn from and use as a reference.
>
> Quinton.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mitch Denny [mailto:mitch.denny@w...]
> Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 12:23 PM
> To: ASP+
> Subject: [aspx] RE: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
>
>
> Quinton,
>
> Given the nature of your site I am surprise that you
> haven't hit on a requirement to use some server-side
> programming.
>
> NET is relitively easy to learn, and free and useful
> support from other developers is very easy to obtain
> from list servers like this ones and others:
>
> http://www.aspfriends.com
> http://discuss.develop.com/dotnet.html
>
> To answer your specific questions:
>
> 1. ASP.NET development is much more structured especially
> if you embrace content, code and layout seperation.
>
> 2. It depends almost 100% on the existing code. To really
> leverage the features of .NET you are going to need to
> touch most of your code to make it type safe and use
> the new data access features. But if you haven't
> hit server-side coding yet I guess you might not have
> to do anything.
>
> 3. Install it now, its stable and reliable, and will
> be released to manufacturing very shortly.
>
> Hope this helps.
>
> ----------------------------------------
> - Mitch Denny
> - http://www.warbyte.com
> - mitch.denny@w...
> - +61 (414) 610-141
> -
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Quinton James Sheppard [mailto:quintons@k...]
> > Sent: Thursday, 1 November 2001 11:51 AM
> > To: ASP+
> > Subject: [aspx] to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
> >
> >
> > I have been hearing alot of praise for the .NET arcutecture,
> > but is it
> > really worth the effort in going to the trouble of learning
> > .NET? I am
> > developing a knowledge base reasearch web site but have not
> > as yet got to
> > the server side programming.
> >
> > What I would like to know is:
> > 1) what advantages does it have over previouse ASP development.
> > 2) is it relativly easy to migrate from ASP 2/3 to ASP.NET?
> > 3) and as the framework is still in it's Beta stage, would I
> > be running
> > before I can walk in respect to the technology.
> >
> > Many thanks,
> > Quinton.
> >
Message #5 by Quinton Sheppard <quintons@k...> on Thu, 1 Nov 2001 15:10:31 -0000
|
|
so why do you think Professional ASP.Net is a goods book?
Regards
Quinton Sheppard
Knowledge Solutions (UK) Limited
Mob +44 (0) 07790 556 389
DDI +44 (0) 1763 257102
Fax +44 (0) xxx xxx xxxx
http://www.knowledgeuk.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Luis Abreu [mailto:luisabreu@n...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 1:48 PM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] RE: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
Professional ASP.Net is a good book (at least to me, that is).
Regards,
Luis Abreu
http://www.luisabreu.go.cc/
mailto:luisabreu@n...
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Quinton Sheppard [mailto:quintons@k...]
> Sent: quinta-feira, 1 de Novembro de 2001 14:47
> To: ASP+
> Subject: [aspx] RE: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
>
> Mitch,
>
> Thanks for your comments. I will have to use server side programming
> (hence
> a need for a database), and have programmed in ASP 2.0 and VB5 COM.
This I
> hope will help me in understanding ASP.NET.
>
> Is there a book that you would recommend to me in learning ASP.NET? I
am
> thinking of getting the Wrox press book on ASP.NET but unsure if it
will
> be
> a good book to learn from and use as a reference.
>
> Quinton.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mitch Denny [mailto:mitch.denny@w...]
> Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 12:23 PM
> To: ASP+
> Subject: [aspx] RE: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
>
>
> Quinton,
>
> Given the nature of your site I am surprise that you
> haven't hit on a requirement to use some server-side
> programming.
>
> NET is relitively easy to learn, and free and useful
> support from other developers is very easy to obtain
> from list servers like this ones and others:
>
> http://www.aspfriends.com
> http://discuss.develop.com/dotnet.html
>
> To answer your specific questions:
>
> 1. ASP.NET development is much more structured especially
> if you embrace content, code and layout seperation.
>
> 2. It depends almost 100% on the existing code. To really
> leverage the features of .NET you are going to need to
> touch most of your code to make it type safe and use
> the new data access features. But if you haven't
> hit server-side coding yet I guess you might not have
> to do anything.
>
> 3. Install it now, its stable and reliable, and will
> be released to manufacturing very shortly.
>
> Hope this helps.
>
> ----------------------------------------
> - Mitch Denny
> - http://www.warbyte.com
> - mitch.denny@w...
> - +61 (414) 610-141
> -
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Quinton James Sheppard [mailto:quintons@k...]
> > Sent: Thursday, 1 November 2001 11:51 AM
> > To: ASP+
> > Subject: [aspx] to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
> >
> >
> > I have been hearing alot of praise for the .NET arcutecture,
> > but is it
> > really worth the effort in going to the trouble of learning
> > .NET? I am
> > developing a knowledge base reasearch web site but have not
> > as yet got to
> > the server side programming.
> >
> > What I would like to know is:
> > 1) what advantages does it have over previouse ASP development.
> > 2) is it relativly easy to migrate from ASP 2/3 to ASP.NET?
> > 3) and as the framework is still in it's Beta stage, would I
> > be running
> > before I can walk in respect to the technology.
> >
> > Many thanks,
> > Quinton.
> >
Message #6 by "Daniel Walker" <danielw@w...> on Thu, 1 Nov 2001 14:31:26
|
|
> 1) what advantages does it have over previouse ASP development.
It runs faster and, if properly developed, the code is cleaner and thus
easier to debug and maintain. Data access is a breeze and like all
Microsoft technologies, you can learn the basic technology very fast indeed
and get good results from it, adding further refinements later on as your
confidence grows.
> 2) is it relativly easy to migrate from ASP 2/3 to ASP.NET?
If I understand you correctly, you aren't, are you? You say you haven't
started server-side programming. Do you mean, as Mitch takes you to mean,
that you have some legacy code that will need porting or do you mean will
it be easy for ASP prograammers to learn .NET? If the latter, then it
depends on things like whether or not they have done any object-oriented
programming before. For someone like yourself, it may be a benefit to come
to .NET with a clean slate, so to speak.
> 3) and as the framework is still in it's Beta stage, would I be running
> before I can walk in respect to the technology.
The framework is due for release very shortly. It would be a good idea to
run on a test machine, for now, but it is more approriate to say that .NET
is in release-candidate stage than in beta stage.
What have you to lose? Knowing stuff never made anybody any less
employable. The desktop is dead: long live the Web application.
Daniel Walker
Wrox Press
Message #7 by Quinton Sheppard <quintons@k...> on Thu, 1 Nov 2001 15:42:41 -0000
|
|
I do have the Beta 2 realease at present, would the code developed with this
version be fine to place on a machine with the final realease?
and for another question: is it possible to send a request to the server and
reseve a response without having to refresh the browser screen?
Quinton.
-----Original Message-----
From: Daniel Walker [mailto:danielw@w...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 2:31 PM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] Re: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
> 1) what advantages does it have over previouse ASP development.
It runs faster and, if properly developed, the code is cleaner and thus
easier to debug and maintain. Data access is a breeze and like all
Microsoft technologies, you can learn the basic technology very fast indeed
and get good results from it, adding further refinements later on as your
confidence grows.
> 2) is it relativly easy to migrate from ASP 2/3 to ASP.NET?
If I understand you correctly, you aren't, are you? You say you haven't
started server-side programming. Do you mean, as Mitch takes you to mean,
that you have some legacy code that will need porting or do you mean will
it be easy for ASP prograammers to learn .NET? If the latter, then it
depends on things like whether or not they have done any object-oriented
programming before. For someone like yourself, it may be a benefit to come
to .NET with a clean slate, so to speak.
> 3) and as the framework is still in it's Beta stage, would I be running
> before I can walk in respect to the technology.
The framework is due for release very shortly. It would be a good idea to
run on a test machine, for now, but it is more approriate to say that .NET
is in release-candidate stage than in beta stage.
What have you to lose? Knowing stuff never made anybody any less
employable. The desktop is dead: long live the Web application.
Daniel Walker
Wrox Press
Message #8 by Todd Carrico <ToddC@m...> on Thu, 1 Nov 2001 08:43:47 -0600
|
|
You can obtain a production license for ASP.NET right now, I understand.
The ASP.NET bits are really very stable.
The community of developers is a big reason to go .NET. Much better than
what we had for ASP 2/3.
Jump in the water is fine...
tc
-----Original Message-----
From: Daniel Walker [mailto:danielw@w...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 8:31 AM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] Re: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
> 1) what advantages does it have over previouse ASP development.
It runs faster and, if properly developed, the code is cleaner and thus
easier to debug and maintain. Data access is a breeze and like all
Microsoft technologies, you can learn the basic technology very fast indeed
and get good results from it, adding further refinements later on as your
confidence grows.
> 2) is it relativly easy to migrate from ASP 2/3 to ASP.NET?
If I understand you correctly, you aren't, are you? You say you haven't
started server-side programming. Do you mean, as Mitch takes you to mean,
that you have some legacy code that will need porting or do you mean will
it be easy for ASP prograammers to learn .NET? If the latter, then it
depends on things like whether or not they have done any object-oriented
programming before. For someone like yourself, it may be a benefit to come
to .NET with a clean slate, so to speak.
> 3) and as the framework is still in it's Beta stage, would I be running
> before I can walk in respect to the technology.
The framework is due for release very shortly. It would be a good idea to
run on a test machine, for now, but it is more approriate to say that .NET
is in release-candidate stage than in beta stage.
What have you to lose? Knowing stuff never made anybody any less
employable. The desktop is dead: long live the Web application.
Daniel Walker
Wrox Press
Message #9 by "Yu, Kevin" <kyu@N...> on Thu, 1 Nov 2001 09:44:28 -0500
|
|
<configuration>
<system.web>
<compilation debug="true"/>
<pages smartNavigation="true"/>
</system.web>
</configuration>
it won't be too many changes between beta 2 and the final release
-----Original Message-----
From: Quinton Sheppard [mailto:quintons@k...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 8:43 AM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] Re: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
I do have the Beta 2 realease at present, would the code developed with this
version be fine to place on a machine with the final realease?
and for another question: is it possible to send a request to the server and
reseve a response without having to refresh the browser screen?
Quinton.
-----Original Message-----
From: Daniel Walker [mailto:danielw@w...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 2:31 PM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] Re: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
> 1) what advantages does it have over previouse ASP development.
It runs faster and, if properly developed, the code is cleaner and thus
easier to debug and maintain. Data access is a breeze and like all
Microsoft technologies, you can learn the basic technology very fast indeed
and get good results from it, adding further refinements later on as your
confidence grows.
> 2) is it relativly easy to migrate from ASP 2/3 to ASP.NET?
If I understand you correctly, you aren't, are you? You say you haven't
started server-side programming. Do you mean, as Mitch takes you to mean,
that you have some legacy code that will need porting or do you mean will
it be easy for ASP prograammers to learn .NET? If the latter, then it
depends on things like whether or not they have done any object-oriented
programming before. For someone like yourself, it may be a benefit to come
to .NET with a clean slate, so to speak.
> 3) and as the framework is still in it's Beta stage, would I be running
> before I can walk in respect to the technology.
The framework is due for release very shortly. It would be a good idea to
run on a test machine, for now, but it is more approriate to say that .NET
is in release-candidate stage than in beta stage.
What have you to lose? Knowing stuff never made anybody any less
employable. The desktop is dead: long live the Web application.
Daniel Walker
Wrox Press
Message #10 by Todd Carrico <ToddC@m...> on Thu, 1 Nov 2001 08:46:11 -0600
|
|
I have seen some interesting stuff done with inline frames, but it only
works in IE (6?).
Not sure what you mean by reserve a response, without refreshing the
browser. The trick above refreshes what is in the frame and leaves the rest
of the page alone.
tc
-----Original Message-----
From: Quinton Sheppard [mailto:quintons@k...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 9:43 AM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] Re: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
I do have the Beta 2 realease at present, would the code developed with this
version be fine to place on a machine with the final realease?
and for another question: is it possible to send a request to the server and
reseve a response without having to refresh the browser screen?
Quinton.
-----Original Message-----
From: Daniel Walker [mailto:danielw@w...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 2:31 PM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] Re: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
> 1) what advantages does it have over previouse ASP development.
It runs faster and, if properly developed, the code is cleaner and thus
easier to debug and maintain. Data access is a breeze and like all
Microsoft technologies, you can learn the basic technology very fast indeed
and get good results from it, adding further refinements later on as your
confidence grows.
> 2) is it relativly easy to migrate from ASP 2/3 to ASP.NET?
If I understand you correctly, you aren't, are you? You say you haven't
started server-side programming. Do you mean, as Mitch takes you to mean,
that you have some legacy code that will need porting or do you mean will
it be easy for ASP prograammers to learn .NET? If the latter, then it
depends on things like whether or not they have done any object-oriented
programming before. For someone like yourself, it may be a benefit to come
to .NET with a clean slate, so to speak.
> 3) and as the framework is still in it's Beta stage, would I be running
> before I can walk in respect to the technology.
The framework is due for release very shortly. It would be a good idea to
run on a test machine, for now, but it is more approriate to say that .NET
is in release-candidate stage than in beta stage.
What have you to lose? Knowing stuff never made anybody any less
employable. The desktop is dead: long live the Web application.
Daniel Walker
Wrox Press
Message #11 by "Yu, Kevin" <kyu@N...> on Thu, 1 Nov 2001 09:57:13 -0500
|
|
and the good thing is asp.net will be free for download once it's released.
-----Original Message-----
From: Todd Carrico [mailto:ToddC@m...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 7:44 AM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] Re: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
You can obtain a production license for ASP.NET right now, I understand.
The ASP.NET bits are really very stable.
The community of developers is a big reason to go .NET. Much better than
what we had for ASP 2/3.
Jump in the water is fine...
tc
-----Original Message-----
From: Daniel Walker [mailto:danielw@w...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 8:31 AM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] Re: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
> 1) what advantages does it have over previouse ASP development.
It runs faster and, if properly developed, the code is cleaner and thus
easier to debug and maintain. Data access is a breeze and like all
Microsoft technologies, you can learn the basic technology very fast indeed
and get good results from it, adding further refinements later on as your
confidence grows.
> 2) is it relativly easy to migrate from ASP 2/3 to ASP.NET?
If I understand you correctly, you aren't, are you? You say you haven't
started server-side programming. Do you mean, as Mitch takes you to mean,
that you have some legacy code that will need porting or do you mean will
it be easy for ASP prograammers to learn .NET? If the latter, then it
depends on things like whether or not they have done any object-oriented
programming before. For someone like yourself, it may be a benefit to come
to .NET with a clean slate, so to speak.
> 3) and as the framework is still in it's Beta stage, would I be running
> before I can walk in respect to the technology.
The framework is due for release very shortly. It would be a good idea to
run on a test machine, for now, but it is more approriate to say that .NET
is in release-candidate stage than in beta stage.
What have you to lose? Knowing stuff never made anybody any less
employable. The desktop is dead: long live the Web application.
Daniel Walker
Wrox Press
Message #12 by "Sean Bytnar" <sdbytna@i...> on Thu, 1 Nov 2001 09:00:16 -0600
|
|
I'm currently reading SAMS Teach Yourself ASP.NET in 21 days. Most examples
are in VB which would benefit you. I think it's a great book as a starter.
It provides examples and good explanations for all the major features of
ASP.NET.
Sean
-----Original Message-----
From: Quinton Sheppard [mailto:quintons@k...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 8:47 AM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] RE: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
Mitch,
Thanks for your comments. I will have to use server side programming (hence
a need for a database), and have programmed in ASP 2.0 and VB5 COM. This I
hope will help me in understanding ASP.NET.
Is there a book that you would recommend to me in learning ASP.NET? I am
thinking of getting the Wrox press book on ASP.NET but unsure if it will be
a good book to learn from and use as a reference.
Quinton.
-----Original Message-----
From: Mitch Denny [mailto:mitch.denny@w...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 12:23 PM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] RE: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
Quinton,
Given the nature of your site I am surprise that you
haven't hit on a requirement to use some server-side
programming.
.NET is relitively easy to learn, and free and useful
support from other developers is very easy to obtain
from list servers like this ones and others:
http://www.aspfriends.com
http://discuss.develop.com/dotnet.html
To answer your specific questions:
1. ASP.NET development is much more structured especially
if you embrace content, code and layout seperation.
2. It depends almost 100% on the existing code. To really
leverage the features of .NET you are going to need to
touch most of your code to make it type safe and use
the new data access features. But if you haven't
hit server-side coding yet I guess you might not have
to do anything.
3. Install it now, its stable and reliable, and will
be released to manufacturing very shortly.
Hope this helps.
----------------------------------------
- Mitch Denny
- http://www.warbyte.com
- mitch.denny@w...
- +61 (414) 610-141
-
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Quinton James Sheppard [mailto:quintons@k...]
> Sent: Thursday, 1 November 2001 11:51 AM
> To: ASP+
> Subject: [aspx] to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
>
>
> I have been hearing alot of praise for the .NET arcutecture,
> but is it
> really worth the effort in going to the trouble of learning
> .NET? I am
> developing a knowledge base reasearch web site but have not
> as yet got to
> the server side programming.
>
> What I would like to know is:
> 1) what advantages does it have over previouse ASP development.
> 2) is it relativly easy to migrate from ASP 2/3 to ASP.NET?
> 3) and as the framework is still in it's Beta stage, would I
> be running
> before I can walk in respect to the technology.
>
> Many thanks,
> Quinton.
>
Message #13 by Quinton Sheppard <quintons@k...> on Thu, 1 Nov 2001 16:20:06 -0000
|
|
and I presume that would be the SDK? and not the full Visual Studio.NET
package.
-----Original Message-----
From: Yu, Kevin [mailto:kyu@N...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 2:57 PM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] Re: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
and the good thing is asp.net will be free for download once it's released.
-----Original Message-----
From: Todd Carrico [mailto:ToddC@m...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 7:44 AM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] Re: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
You can obtain a production license for ASP.NET right now, I understand.
The ASP.NET bits are really very stable.
The community of developers is a big reason to go .NET. Much better than
what we had for ASP 2/3.
Jump in the water is fine...
tc
-----Original Message-----
From: Daniel Walker [mailto:danielw@w...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 8:31 AM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] Re: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
> 1) what advantages does it have over previouse ASP development.
It runs faster and, if properly developed, the code is cleaner and thus
easier to debug and maintain. Data access is a breeze and like all
Microsoft technologies, you can learn the basic technology very fast indeed
and get good results from it, adding further refinements later on as your
confidence grows.
> 2) is it relativly easy to migrate from ASP 2/3 to ASP.NET?
If I understand you correctly, you aren't, are you? You say you haven't
started server-side programming. Do you mean, as Mitch takes you to mean,
that you have some legacy code that will need porting or do you mean will
it be easy for ASP prograammers to learn .NET? If the latter, then it
depends on things like whether or not they have done any object-oriented
programming before. For someone like yourself, it may be a benefit to come
to .NET with a clean slate, so to speak.
> 3) and as the framework is still in it's Beta stage, would I be running
> before I can walk in respect to the technology.
The framework is due for release very shortly. It would be a good idea to
run on a test machine, for now, but it is more approriate to say that .NET
is in release-candidate stage than in beta stage.
What have you to lose? Knowing stuff never made anybody any less
employable. The desktop is dead: long live the Web application.
Daniel Walker
Wrox Press
Message #14 by Quinton Sheppard <quintons@k...> on Thu, 1 Nov 2001 16:22:26 -0000
|
|
I am unable to use Com objects on the server we are using so I will have to
be using Scripting. so will the book still provide a good starter?
-----Original Message-----
From: Sean Bytnar [mailto:sdbytna@i...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 3:00 PM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] RE: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
I'm currently reading SAMS Teach Yourself ASP.NET in 21 days. Most examples
are in VB which would benefit you. I think it's a great book as a starter.
It provides examples and good explanations for all the major features of
ASP.NET.
Sean
-----Original Message-----
From: Quinton Sheppard [mailto:quintons@k...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 8:47 AM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] RE: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
Mitch,
Thanks for your comments. I will have to use server side programming (hence
a need for a database), and have programmed in ASP 2.0 and VB5 COM. This I
hope will help me in understanding ASP.NET.
Is there a book that you would recommend to me in learning ASP.NET? I am
thinking of getting the Wrox press book on ASP.NET but unsure if it will be
a good book to learn from and use as a reference.
Quinton.
-----Original Message-----
From: Mitch Denny [mailto:mitch.denny@w...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 12:23 PM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] RE: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
Quinton,
Given the nature of your site I am surprise that you
haven't hit on a requirement to use some server-side
programming.
.NET is relitively easy to learn, and free and useful
support from other developers is very easy to obtain
from list servers like this ones and others:
http://www.aspfriends.com
http://discuss.develop.com/dotnet.html
To answer your specific questions:
1. ASP.NET development is much more structured especially
if you embrace content, code and layout seperation.
2. It depends almost 100% on the existing code. To really
leverage the features of .NET you are going to need to
touch most of your code to make it type safe and use
the new data access features. But if you haven't
hit server-side coding yet I guess you might not have
to do anything.
3. Install it now, its stable and reliable, and will
be released to manufacturing very shortly.
Hope this helps.
----------------------------------------
- Mitch Denny
- http://www.warbyte.com
- mitch.denny@w...
- +61 (414) 610-141
-
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Quinton James Sheppard [mailto:quintons@k...]
> Sent: Thursday, 1 November 2001 11:51 AM
> To: ASP+
> Subject: [aspx] to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
>
>
> I have been hearing alot of praise for the .NET arcutecture,
> but is it
> really worth the effort in going to the trouble of learning
> .NET? I am
> developing a knowledge base reasearch web site but have not
> as yet got to
> the server side programming.
>
> What I would like to know is:
> 1) what advantages does it have over previouse ASP development.
> 2) is it relativly easy to migrate from ASP 2/3 to ASP.NET?
> 3) and as the framework is still in it's Beta stage, would I
> be running
> before I can walk in respect to the technology.
>
> Many thanks,
> Quinton.
Message #15 by "Albert Davis" <albertdavis@h...> on Thu, 01 Nov 2001 10:20:04 -0500
|
|
Quinton,
To answer your question yes you can, and there are a number of ways of
achieving this type of async request/responses with HTTP being a stateless
protocol...
One way of achieving this is to use a Design Type Control that Microsoft has
developed call "PageObject" (in ASP 2/3 versions) which operates as a Java
Proxy for sending and receiving calls.
A much more simple way (which we like to use) is using some out-of-the-box
HTML 4.0 (IE only version 4 and above) compliant objects and some simple
DHTML:
For simplicity lets do a "hello world" example:
I'll use legacy ASP but you can apply the same theory to ASP.NET with
ease...
You'll need 2 ASP pages:
The first ASP page will be the page that processes your business logic and
it receives various query strings that handle which sub or function that
needs to be called and in our case "HelloWorld":
"ASPBusinessLogic.asp"
... ASP Language Directives etc...
...
...
sub HelloWorld()
<%
<script language="JavaScript">
window.parent.document.all("tdHelloWorld").innerHTML = "<b>Hello
World</b>";
</script>
%>
end sub
select case Request("function")
case "helloworld"
call HelloWorld()
case else
Response.Write("You are not permitted to view this page...")
end select
Our second ASP page will be the driver or consumer of
"ASPBusinessLogic.asp":
"ASPDriver.asp"
... ASP Language Directives etc...
...
...
%>
<script language="JavaScript">
function HelloWorld(){
document.all("ifrmRemote").src =
"ASPBusinessLogin.asp?function=HelloWorld";
}
</script>
<%
...
... Response.Write with "<html><body>" etc...
...
Response.Write("<table cellpadding=0 cellspacing=0 border=0>" & _
"<tr><td id=tdHelloWorld>Click on the button below to
execute our test HelloWorld function</td></tr>" & _
"<tr><td><input type=button onclick=HelloWorld></td></tr>"
& _
"<tr><td style='display:none;'><iframe
id=ifrmRemote></iframe></td></tr>" & _
"</table>")
You can clearly get more sophistocated with this as need be such as
responding to a parent JavaScript function with
"window.parent.YourJavaScriptFunction('YourParams');" and so on... But this
will fully give you the functionality of executing server-side logic at
runtime and getting just the information that you need back... Remember
though that IE 4.0 and above supports the IFRAME Object.
Hope this helped as an overview,
Al
>From: Todd Carrico <ToddC@m...>
>Reply-To: "ASP+" <aspx@p...>
>To: "ASP+" <aspx@p...>
>Subject: [aspx] Re: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
>Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2001 08:46:11 -0600
>
>I have seen some interesting stuff done with inline frames, but it only
>works in IE (6?).
>
>Not sure what you mean by reserve a response, without refreshing the
>browser. The trick above refreshes what is in the frame and leaves the
>rest
>of the page alone.
>
>tc
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Quinton Sheppard [mailto:quintons@k...]
>Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 9:43 AM
>To: ASP+
>Subject: [aspx] Re: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
>
>I do have the Beta 2 realease at present, would the code developed with
>this
>version be fine to place on a machine with the final realease?
>
>and for another question: is it possible to send a request to the server
>and
>reseve a response without having to refresh the browser screen?
>
>Quinton.
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Daniel Walker [mailto:danielw@w...]
>Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 2:31 PM
>To: ASP+
>Subject: [aspx] Re: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
>
>
> > 1) what advantages does it have over previouse ASP development.
>
>It runs faster and, if properly developed, the code is cleaner and thus
>easier to debug and maintain. Data access is a breeze and like all
>Microsoft technologies, you can learn the basic technology very fast indeed
>and get good results from it, adding further refinements later on as your
>confidence grows.
>
> > 2) is it relativly easy to migrate from ASP 2/3 to ASP.NET?
>
>If I understand you correctly, you aren't, are you? You say you haven't
>started server-side programming. Do you mean, as Mitch takes you to mean,
>that you have some legacy code that will need porting or do you mean will
>it be easy for ASP prograammers to learn .NET? If the latter, then it
>depends on things like whether or not they have done any object-oriented
>programming before. For someone like yourself, it may be a benefit to come
>to .NET with a clean slate, so to speak.
>
> > 3) and as the framework is still in it's Beta stage, would I be running
> > before I can walk in respect to the technology.
>
>The framework is due for release very shortly. It would be a good idea to
>run on a test machine, for now, but it is more approriate to say that .NET
>is in release-candidate stage than in beta stage.
>
>What have you to lose? Knowing stuff never made anybody any less
>employable. The desktop is dead: long live the Web application.
>
>Daniel Walker
>Wrox Press
>
>
Message #16 by Todd Carrico <ToddC@m...> on Thu, 1 Nov 2001 09:21:46 -0600
|
|
The last one I remember was around 18 mb, so it wasn't a full SDK. (I did
not go this route, so my information could be suspect).
I think it is safe to say that VS.NET is not part of it.
tc
-----Original Message-----
From: Quinton Sheppard [mailto:quintons@k...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 10:20 AM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] Re: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
and I presume that would be the SDK? and not the full Visual Studio.NET
package.
-----Original Message-----
From: Yu, Kevin [mailto:kyu@N...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 2:57 PM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] Re: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
and the good thing is asp.net will be free for download once it's released.
-----Original Message-----
From: Todd Carrico [mailto:ToddC@m...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 7:44 AM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] Re: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
You can obtain a production license for ASP.NET right now, I understand.
The ASP.NET bits are really very stable.
The community of developers is a big reason to go .NET. Much better than
what we had for ASP 2/3.
Jump in the water is fine...
tc
-----Original Message-----
From: Daniel Walker [mailto:danielw@w...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 8:31 AM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] Re: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
> 1) what advantages does it have over previouse ASP development.
It runs faster and, if properly developed, the code is cleaner and thus
easier to debug and maintain. Data access is a breeze and like all
Microsoft technologies, you can learn the basic technology very fast indeed
and get good results from it, adding further refinements later on as your
confidence grows.
> 2) is it relativly easy to migrate from ASP 2/3 to ASP.NET?
If I understand you correctly, you aren't, are you? You say you haven't
started server-side programming. Do you mean, as Mitch takes you to mean,
that you have some legacy code that will need porting or do you mean will
it be easy for ASP prograammers to learn .NET? If the latter, then it
depends on things like whether or not they have done any object-oriented
programming before. For someone like yourself, it may be a benefit to come
to .NET with a clean slate, so to speak.
> 3) and as the framework is still in it's Beta stage, would I be running
> before I can walk in respect to the technology.
The framework is due for release very shortly. It would be a good idea to
run on a test machine, for now, but it is more approriate to say that .NET
is in release-candidate stage than in beta stage.
What have you to lose? Knowing stuff never made anybody any less
employable. The desktop is dead: long live the Web application.
Daniel Walker
Wrox Press
Message #17 by Todd Carrico <ToddC@m...> on Thu, 1 Nov 2001 09:24:42 -0600
|
|
Yes, it is still possible to use COM in .NET, but the preferred method is to
re-write them in .NET.
I think the confusion here is that Scripting in ASP.NET is out, compiled
languages are in. So you will use VB.NET, or C#.NET to write your ASP pages
from now on. Since you can develop in ASP 2/3 and VB, it is safe to assume
you would use VB.NET to do your ASP.NET work.
Did that make sense?
tc
-----Original Message-----
From: Quinton Sheppard [mailto:quintons@k...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 10:22 AM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] RE: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
I am unable to use Com objects on the server we are using so I will have to
be using Scripting. so will the book still provide a good starter?
-----Original Message-----
From: Sean Bytnar [mailto:sdbytna@i...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 3:00 PM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] RE: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
I'm currently reading SAMS Teach Yourself ASP.NET in 21 days. Most examples
are in VB which would benefit you. I think it's a great book as a starter.
It provides examples and good explanations for all the major features of
ASP.NET.
Sean
-----Original Message-----
From: Quinton Sheppard [mailto:quintons@k...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 8:47 AM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] RE: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
Mitch,
Thanks for your comments. I will have to use server side programming (hence
a need for a database), and have programmed in ASP 2.0 and VB5 COM. This I
hope will help me in understanding ASP.NET.
Is there a book that you would recommend to me in learning ASP.NET? I am
thinking of getting the Wrox press book on ASP.NET but unsure if it will be
a good book to learn from and use as a reference.
Quinton.
-----Original Message-----
From: Mitch Denny [mailto:mitch.denny@w...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 12:23 PM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] RE: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
Quinton,
Given the nature of your site I am surprise that you
haven't hit on a requirement to use some server-side
programming.
.NET is relitively easy to learn, and free and useful
support from other developers is very easy to obtain
from list servers like this ones and others:
http://www.aspfriends.com
http://discuss.develop.com/dotnet.html
To answer your specific questions:
1. ASP.NET development is much more structured especially
if you embrace content, code and layout seperation.
2. It depends almost 100% on the existing code. To really
leverage the features of .NET you are going to need to
touch most of your code to make it type safe and use
the new data access features. But if you haven't
hit server-side coding yet I guess you might not have
to do anything.
3. Install it now, its stable and reliable, and will
be released to manufacturing very shortly.
Hope this helps.
----------------------------------------
- Mitch Denny
- http://www.warbyte.com
- mitch.denny@w...
- +61 (414) 610-141
-
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Quinton James Sheppard [mailto:quintons@k...]
> Sent: Thursday, 1 November 2001 11:51 AM
> To: ASP+
> Subject: [aspx] to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
>
>
> I have been hearing alot of praise for the .NET arcutecture,
> but is it
> really worth the effort in going to the trouble of learning
> .NET? I am
> developing a knowledge base reasearch web site but have not
> as yet got to
> the server side programming.
>
> What I would like to know is:
> 1) what advantages does it have over previouse ASP development.
> 2) is it relativly easy to migrate from ASP 2/3 to ASP.NET?
> 3) and as the framework is still in it's Beta stage, would I
> be running
> before I can walk in respect to the technology.
>
> Many thanks,
> Quinton.
Message #18 by "Albert Davis" <albertdavis@h...> on Thu, 01 Nov 2001 10:28:44 -0500
|
|
Sorry, typed to fast "Design Time Control" not "Type"...
>From: "Albert Davis" <albertdavis@h...>
>Reply-To: "ASP+" <aspx@p...>
>To: "ASP+" <aspx@p...>
>Subject: [aspx] Re: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
>Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2001 10:20:04 -0500
>
>Quinton,
>To answer your question yes you can, and there are a number of ways of
>achieving this type of async request/responses with HTTP being a stateless
>protocol...
>
>One way of achieving this is to use a Design Type Control that Microsoft
>has
>developed call "PageObject" (in ASP 2/3 versions) which operates as a Java
>Proxy for sending and receiving calls.
>
>A much more simple way (which we like to use) is using some out-of-the-box
>HTML 4.0 (IE only version 4 and above) compliant objects and some simple
>DHTML:
>For simplicity lets do a "hello world" example:
>
>I'll use legacy ASP but you can apply the same theory to ASP.NET with
>ease...
>
>You'll need 2 ASP pages:
>The first ASP page will be the page that processes your business logic and
>it receives various query strings that handle which sub or function that
>needs to be called and in our case "HelloWorld":
>
>"ASPBusinessLogic.asp"
>... ASP Language Directives etc...
>...
>...
>
>sub HelloWorld()
> <%
> <script language="JavaScript">
> window.parent.document.all("tdHelloWorld").innerHTML = "<b>Hello
>World</b>";
> </script>
> %>
>end sub
>
>select case Request("function")
> case "helloworld"
> call HelloWorld()
> case else
> Response.Write("You are not permitted to view this page...")
>end select
>
>
>Our second ASP page will be the driver or consumer of
>"ASPBusinessLogic.asp":
>
>"ASPDriver.asp"
>... ASP Language Directives etc...
>...
>...
>
>%>
><script language="JavaScript">
> function HelloWorld(){
> document.all("ifrmRemote").src
>"ASPBusinessLogin.asp?function=HelloWorld";
> }
></script>
><%
>
>...
>... Response.Write with "<html><body>" etc...
>...
>
>Response.Write("<table cellpadding=0 cellspacing=0 border=0>" & _
> "<tr><td id=tdHelloWorld>Click on the button below to
>execute our test HelloWorld function</td></tr>" & _
> "<tr><td><input type=button
>onclick=HelloWorld></td></tr>"
>& _
> "<tr><td style='display:none;'><iframe
>id=ifrmRemote></iframe></td></tr>" & _
> "</table>")
>
>
>You can clearly get more sophistocated with this as need be such as
>responding to a parent JavaScript function with
>"window.parent.YourJavaScriptFunction('YourParams');" and so on... But
>this
>will fully give you the functionality of executing server-side logic at
>runtime and getting just the information that you need back... Remember
>though that IE 4.0 and above supports the IFRAME Object.
>
>Hope this helped as an overview,
>Al
>
>>From: Todd Carrico <ToddC@m...>
>>Reply-To: "ASP+" <aspx@p...>
>>To: "ASP+" <aspx@p...>
>>Subject: [aspx] Re: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
>>Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2001 08:46:11 -0600
>>
>>I have seen some interesting stuff done with inline frames, but it only
>>works in IE (6?).
>>
>>Not sure what you mean by reserve a response, without refreshing the
>>browser. The trick above refreshes what is in the frame and leaves the
>>rest
>>of the page alone.
>>
>>tc
>>
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Quinton Sheppard [mailto:quintons@k...]
>>Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 9:43 AM
>>To: ASP+
>>Subject: [aspx] Re: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
>>
>>I do have the Beta 2 realease at present, would the code developed with
>>this
>>version be fine to place on a machine with the final realease?
>>
>>and for another question: is it possible to send a request to the server
>>and
>>reseve a response without having to refresh the browser screen?
>>
>>Quinton.
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Daniel Walker [mailto:danielw@w...]
>>Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 2:31 PM
>>To: ASP+
>>Subject: [aspx] Re: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
>>
>>
>> > 1) what advantages does it have over previouse ASP development.
>>
>>It runs faster and, if properly developed, the code is cleaner and thus
>>easier to debug and maintain. Data access is a breeze and like all
>>Microsoft technologies, you can learn the basic technology very fast
>>indeed
>>and get good results from it, adding further refinements later on as your
>>confidence grows.
>>
>> > 2) is it relativly easy to migrate from ASP 2/3 to ASP.NET?
>>
>>If I understand you correctly, you aren't, are you? You say you haven't
>>started server-side programming. Do you mean, as Mitch takes you to mean,
>>that you have some legacy code that will need porting or do you mean will
>>it be easy for ASP prograammers to learn .NET? If the latter, then it
>>depends on things like whether or not they have done any object-oriented
>>programming before. For someone like yourself, it may be a benefit to come
>>to .NET with a clean slate, so to speak.
>>
>> > 3) and as the framework is still in it's Beta stage, would I be running
>> > before I can walk in respect to the technology.
>>
>>The framework is due for release very shortly. It would be a good idea to
>>run on a test machine, for now, but it is more approriate to say that .NET
>>is in release-candidate stage than in beta stage.
>>
>>What have you to lose? Knowing stuff never made anybody any less
>>employable. The desktop is dead: long live the Web application.
>>
>>Daniel Walker
>>Wrox Press
Message #19 by Quinton Sheppard <quintons@k...> on Thu, 1 Nov 2001 16:41:52 -0000
|
|
well it was wishfull thinking.
If I developed a site in .NET would I need to aquire/buy any kind of
licencing for the pleasure of having our server side code using .NET?
-----Original Message-----
From: Todd Carrico [mailto:ToddC@m...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 3:22 PM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] Re: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
The last one I remember was around 18 mb, so it wasn't a full SDK. (I did
not go this route, so my information could be suspect).
I think it is safe to say that VS.NET is not part of it.
tc
-----Original Message-----
From: Quinton Sheppard [mailto:quintons@k...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 10:20 AM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] Re: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
and I presume that would be the SDK? and not the full Visual Studio.NET
package.
-----Original Message-----
From: Yu, Kevin [mailto:kyu@N...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 2:57 PM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] Re: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
and the good thing is asp.net will be free for download once it's released.
-----Original Message-----
From: Todd Carrico [mailto:ToddC@m...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 7:44 AM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] Re: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
You can obtain a production license for ASP.NET right now, I understand.
The ASP.NET bits are really very stable.
The community of developers is a big reason to go .NET. Much better than
what we had for ASP 2/3.
Jump in the water is fine...
tc
-----Original Message-----
From: Daniel Walker [mailto:danielw@w...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 8:31 AM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] Re: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
> 1) what advantages does it have over previouse ASP development.
It runs faster and, if properly developed, the code is cleaner and thus
easier to debug and maintain. Data access is a breeze and like all
Microsoft technologies, you can learn the basic technology very fast indeed
and get good results from it, adding further refinements later on as your
confidence grows.
> 2) is it relativly easy to migrate from ASP 2/3 to ASP.NET?
If I understand you correctly, you aren't, are you? You say you haven't
started server-side programming. Do you mean, as Mitch takes you to mean,
that you have some legacy code that will need porting or do you mean will
it be easy for ASP prograammers to learn .NET? If the latter, then it
depends on things like whether or not they have done any object-oriented
programming before. For someone like yourself, it may be a benefit to come
to .NET with a clean slate, so to speak.
> 3) and as the framework is still in it's Beta stage, would I be running
> before I can walk in respect to the technology.
The framework is due for release very shortly. It would be a good idea to
run on a test machine, for now, but it is more approriate to say that .NET
is in release-candidate stage than in beta stage.
What have you to lose? Knowing stuff never made anybody any less
employable. The desktop is dead: long live the Web application.
Daniel Walker
Wrox Press
Message #20 by "Sean Bytnar" <sdbytna@i...> on Thu, 1 Nov 2001 09:39:32 -0600
|
|
My reference to VB was in regards to the language they use for examples.
Since your background is VB, this book would be better than one using C# for
its examples. I think this would be a good starter because it starts out
simple and slowly build on what was previously learned and built. The only
negative I see with it is that its data access is geared more toward Access
than SQL Server but the code conversion between the two is pretty simple.
Sean
-----Original Message-----
From: Quinton Sheppard [mailto:quintons@k...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 10:22 AM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] RE: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
I am unable to use Com objects on the server we are using so I will have to
be using Scripting. so will the book still provide a good starter?
-----Original Message-----
From: Sean Bytnar [mailto:sdbytna@i...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 3:00 PM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] RE: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
I'm currently reading SAMS Teach Yourself ASP.NET in 21 days. Most examples
are in VB which would benefit you. I think it's a great book as a starter.
It provides examples and good explanations for all the major features of
ASP.NET.
Sean
-----Original Message-----
From: Quinton Sheppard [mailto:quintons@k...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 8:47 AM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] RE: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
Mitch,
Thanks for your comments. I will have to use server side programming (hence
a need for a database), and have programmed in ASP 2.0 and VB5 COM. This I
hope will help me in understanding ASP.NET.
Is there a book that you would recommend to me in learning ASP.NET? I am
thinking of getting the Wrox press book on ASP.NET but unsure if it will be
a good book to learn from and use as a reference.
Quinton.
-----Original Message-----
From: Mitch Denny [mailto:mitch.denny@w...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 12:23 PM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] RE: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
Quinton,
Given the nature of your site I am surprise that you
haven't hit on a requirement to use some server-side
programming.
.NET is relitively easy to learn, and free and useful
support from other developers is very easy to obtain
from list servers like this ones and others:
http://www.aspfriends.com
http://discuss.develop.com/dotnet.html
To answer your specific questions:
1. ASP.NET development is much more structured especially
if you embrace content, code and layout seperation.
2. It depends almost 100% on the existing code. To really
leverage the features of .NET you are going to need to
touch most of your code to make it type safe and use
the new data access features. But if you haven't
hit server-side coding yet I guess you might not have
to do anything.
3. Install it now, its stable and reliable, and will
be released to manufacturing very shortly.
Hope this helps.
----------------------------------------
- Mitch Denny
- http://www.warbyte.com
- mitch.denny@w...
- +61 (414) 610-141
-
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Quinton James Sheppard [mailto:quintons@k...]
> Sent: Thursday, 1 November 2001 11:51 AM
> To: ASP+
> Subject: [aspx] to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
>
>
> I have been hearing alot of praise for the .NET arcutecture,
> but is it
> really worth the effort in going to the trouble of learning
> .NET? I am
> developing a knowledge base reasearch web site but have not
> as yet got to
> the server side programming.
>
> What I would like to know is:
> 1) what advantages does it have over previouse ASP development.
> 2) is it relativly easy to migrate from ASP 2/3 to ASP.NET?
> 3) and as the framework is still in it's Beta stage, would I
> be running
> before I can walk in respect to the technology.
>
> Many thanks,
> Quinton.
Message #21 by Quinton Sheppard <quintons@k...> on Thu, 1 Nov 2001 16:46:41 -0000
|
|
well, yes and no. correct me if I'm wrong but you are saying that .NET no
longer uses any kind of scripting language, it is all compiled code (C# or
VB.NET)?
I would then presume that all code is'nt compiled on runtime beacuse the
code is compiled in the first place?
-----Original Message-----
From: Todd Carrico [mailto:ToddC@m...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 3:25 PM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] RE: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
Yes, it is still possible to use COM in .NET, but the preferred method is to
re-write them in .NET.
I think the confusion here is that Scripting in ASP.NET is out, compiled
languages are in. So you will use VB.NET, or C#.NET to write your ASP pages
from now on. Since you can develop in ASP 2/3 and VB, it is safe to assume
you would use VB.NET to do your ASP.NET work.
Did that make sense?
tc
-----Original Message-----
From: Quinton Sheppard [mailto:quintons@k...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 10:22 AM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] RE: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
I am unable to use Com objects on the server we are using so I will have to
be using Scripting. so will the book still provide a good starter?
-----Original Message-----
From: Sean Bytnar [mailto:sdbytna@i...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 3:00 PM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] RE: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
I'm currently reading SAMS Teach Yourself ASP.NET in 21 days. Most examples
are in VB which would benefit you. I think it's a great book as a starter.
It provides examples and good explanations for all the major features of
ASP.NET.
Sean
-----Original Message-----
From: Quinton Sheppard [mailto:quintons@k...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 8:47 AM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] RE: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
Mitch,
Thanks for your comments. I will have to use server side programming (hence
a need for a database), and have programmed in ASP 2.0 and VB5 COM. This I
hope will help me in understanding ASP.NET.
Is there a book that you would recommend to me in learning ASP.NET? I am
thinking of getting the Wrox press book on ASP.NET but unsure if it will be
a good book to learn from and use as a reference.
Quinton.
-----Original Message-----
From: Mitch Denny [mailto:mitch.denny@w...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 12:23 PM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] RE: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
Quinton,
Given the nature of your site I am surprise that you
haven't hit on a requirement to use some server-side
programming.
.NET is relitively easy to learn, and free and useful
support from other developers is very easy to obtain
from list servers like this ones and others:
http://www.aspfriends.com
http://discuss.develop.com/dotnet.html
To answer your specific questions:
1. ASP.NET development is much more structured especially
if you embrace content, code and layout seperation.
2. It depends almost 100% on the existing code. To really
leverage the features of .NET you are going to need to
touch most of your code to make it type safe and use
the new data access features. But if you haven't
hit server-side coding yet I guess you might not have
to do anything.
3. Install it now, its stable and reliable, and will
be released to manufacturing very shortly.
Hope this helps.
----------------------------------------
- Mitch Denny
- http://www.warbyte.com
- mitch.denny@w...
- +61 (414) 610-141
-
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Quinton James Sheppard [mailto:quintons@k...]
> Sent: Thursday, 1 November 2001 11:51 AM
> To: ASP+
> Subject: [aspx] to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
>
>
> I have been hearing alot of praise for the .NET arcutecture,
> but is it
> really worth the effort in going to the trouble of learning
> .NET? I am
> developing a knowledge base reasearch web site but have not
> as yet got to
> the server side programming.
>
> What I would like to know is:
> 1) what advantages does it have over previouse ASP development.
> 2) is it relativly easy to migrate from ASP 2/3 to ASP.NET?
> 3) and as the framework is still in it's Beta stage, would I
> be running
> before I can walk in respect to the technology.
>
> Many thanks,
> Quinton.
Message #22 by "Albert Davis" <albertdavis@h...> on Thu, 01 Nov 2001 10:46:51 -0500
|
|
Todd does have a point... But COM Interop is one of the main selling points
for migrating to .NET, Leave your current business logic in COM components,
build Proxy's to communicate with them, and slowly start to rewrite your COM
components as you get time throughout your migration plan...
>From: Todd Carrico <ToddC@m...>
>Reply-To: "ASP+" <aspx@p...>
>To: "ASP+" <aspx@p...>
>Subject: [aspx] RE: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
>Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2001 09:24:42 -0600
>
>Yes, it is still possible to use COM in .NET, but the preferred method is
>to
>re-write them in .NET.
>
>I think the confusion here is that Scripting in ASP.NET is out, compiled
>languages are in. So you will use VB.NET, or C#.NET to write your ASP
>pages
>from now on. Since you can develop in ASP 2/3 and VB, it is safe to assume
>you would use VB.NET to do your ASP.NET work.
>
>Did that make sense?
>
>tc
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Quinton Sheppard [mailto:quintons@k...]
>Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 10:22 AM
>To: ASP+
>Subject: [aspx] RE: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
>
>I am unable to use Com objects on the server we are using so I will have to
>be using Scripting. so will the book still provide a good starter?
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Sean Bytnar [mailto:sdbytna@i...]
>Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 3:00 PM
>To: ASP+
>Subject: [aspx] RE: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
>
>
>I'm currently reading SAMS Teach Yourself ASP.NET in 21 days. Most
>examples
>are in VB which would benefit you. I think it's a great book as a starter.
>It provides examples and good explanations for all the major features of
>ASP.NET.
>
>Sean
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Quinton Sheppard [mailto:quintons@k...]
>Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 8:47 AM
>To: ASP+
>Subject: [aspx] RE: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
>
>
>Mitch,
>
>Thanks for your comments. I will have to use server side programming (hence
>a need for a database), and have programmed in ASP 2.0 and VB5 COM. This I
>hope will help me in understanding ASP.NET.
>
>Is there a book that you would recommend to me in learning ASP.NET? I am
>thinking of getting the Wrox press book on ASP.NET but unsure if it will be
>a good book to learn from and use as a reference.
>
>Quinton.
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Mitch Denny [mailto:mitch.denny@w...]
>Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 12:23 PM
>To: ASP+
>Subject: [aspx] RE: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
>
>
>Quinton,
>
>Given the nature of your site I am surprise that you
>haven't hit on a requirement to use some server-side
>programming.
>
>.NET is relitively easy to learn, and free and useful
>support from other developers is very easy to obtain
>from list servers like this ones and others:
>
> http://www.aspfriends.com
> http://discuss.develop.com/dotnet.html
>
>To answer your specific questions:
>
> 1. ASP.NET development is much more structured especially
> if you embrace content, code and layout seperation.
>
> 2. It depends almost 100% on the existing code. To really
> leverage the features of .NET you are going to need to
> touch most of your code to make it type safe and use
> the new data access features. But if you haven't
> hit server-side coding yet I guess you might not have
> to do anything.
>
> 3. Install it now, its stable and reliable, and will
> be released to manufacturing very shortly.
>
>Hope this helps.
>
>----------------------------------------
>- Mitch Denny
>- http://www.warbyte.com
>- mitch.denny@w...
>- +61 (414) 610-141
>-
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Quinton James Sheppard [mailto:quintons@k...]
> > Sent: Thursday, 1 November 2001 11:51 AM
> > To: ASP+
> > Subject: [aspx] to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
> >
> >
> > I have been hearing alot of praise for the .NET arcutecture,
> > but is it
> > really worth the effort in going to the trouble of learning
> > .NET? I am
> > developing a knowledge base reasearch web site but have not
> > as yet got to
> > the server side programming.
> >
> > What I would like to know is:
> > 1) what advantages does it have over previouse ASP development.
> > 2) is it relativly easy to migrate from ASP 2/3 to ASP.NET?
> > 3) and as the framework is still in it's Beta stage, would I
> > be running
> > before I can walk in respect to the technology.
> >
> > Many thanks,
> > Quinton.
Message #23 by "Paul Birch" <paulbirch@b...> on Thu, 1 Nov 2001 16:02:02 -0000
|
|
Almost right, the code is in an intermediate format that gets compiled at
runtime so that the compiler can take advantage of any OS type features that
the machine may have. Once compiles (which is very quick) at runtime, the
code will not get compiled again (don't think of this as an interpretted
system as that is totally wrong).
This is kind of like what Java provides, but on a slightly grander scale
(the code is compiles at some point and remainins compiled).
This makes for a slightly slower startup but ultimately the code runs at
optimum speed from then on (also note that the entire block of code is not
compiled at onece, but in separate chunks so that the comile isn't to
noticable).
-----Original Message-----
From: Quinton Sheppard [mailto:quintons@k...]
Sent: 01 November 2001 16:47
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] RE: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
well, yes and no. correct me if I'm wrong but you are saying that .NET no
longer uses any kind of scripting language, it is all compiled code (C# or
VB.NET)?
I would then presume that all code is'nt compiled on runtime beacuse the
code is compiled in the first place?
-----Original Message-----
From: Todd Carrico [mailto:ToddC@m...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 3:25 PM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] RE: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
Yes, it is still possible to use COM in .NET, but the preferred method is to
re-write them in .NET.
I think the confusion here is that Scripting in ASP.NET is out, compiled
languages are in. So you will use VB.NET, or C#.NET to write your ASP pages
from now on. Since you can develop in ASP 2/3 and VB, it is safe to assume
you would use VB.NET to do your ASP.NET work.
Did that make sense?
tc
-----Original Message-----
From: Quinton Sheppard [mailto:quintons@k...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 10:22 AM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] RE: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
I am unable to use Com objects on the server we are using so I will have to
be using Scripting. so will the book still provide a good starter?
-----Original Message-----
From: Sean Bytnar [mailto:sdbytna@i...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 3:00 PM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] RE: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
I'm currently reading SAMS Teach Yourself ASP.NET in 21 days. Most examples
are in VB which would benefit you. I think it's a great book as a starter.
It provides examples and good explanations for all the major features of
ASP.NET.
Sean
-----Original Message-----
From: Quinton Sheppard [mailto:quintons@k...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 8:47 AM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] RE: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
Mitch,
Thanks for your comments. I will have to use server side programming (hence
a need for a database), and have programmed in ASP 2.0 and VB5 COM. This I
hope will help me in understanding ASP.NET.
Is there a book that you would recommend to me in learning ASP.NET? I am
thinking of getting the Wrox press book on ASP.NET but unsure if it will be
a good book to learn from and use as a reference.
Quinton.
-----Original Message-----
From: Mitch Denny [mailto:mitch.denny@w...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 12:23 PM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] RE: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
Quinton,
Given the nature of your site I am surprise that you
haven't hit on a requirement to use some server-side
programming.
.NET is relitively easy to learn, and free and useful
support from other developers is very easy to obtain
from list servers like this ones and others:
http://www.aspfriends.com
http://discuss.develop.com/dotnet.html
To answer your specific questions:
1. ASP.NET development is much more structured especially
if you embrace content, code and layout seperation.
2. It depends almost 100% on the existing code. To really
leverage the features of .NET you are going to need to
touch most of your code to make it type safe and use
the new data access features. But if you haven't
hit server-side coding yet I guess you might not have
to do anything.
3. Install it now, its stable and reliable, and will
be released to manufacturing very shortly.
Hope this helps.
----------------------------------------
- Mitch Denny
- http://www.warbyte.com
- mitch.denny@w...
- +61 (414) 610-141
-
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Quinton James Sheppard [mailto:quintons@k...]
> Sent: Thursday, 1 November 2001 11:51 AM
> To: ASP+
> Subject: [aspx] to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
>
>
> I have been hearing alot of praise for the .NET arcutecture,
> but is it
> really worth the effort in going to the trouble of learning
> .NET? I am
> developing a knowledge base reasearch web site but have not
> as yet got to
> the server side programming.
>
> What I would like to know is:
> 1) what advantages does it have over previouse ASP development.
> 2) is it relativly easy to migrate from ASP 2/3 to ASP.NET?
> 3) and as the framework is still in it's Beta stage, would I
> be running
> before I can walk in respect to the technology.
>
> Many thanks,
> Quinton.
Message #24 by "Yu, Kevin" <kyu@N...> on Thu, 1 Nov 2001 11:28:10 -0500
|
|
no. of course not, but vs.net is just s IDE.
-----Original Message-----
From: Quinton Sheppard [mailto:quintons@k...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 9:20 AM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] Re: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
and I presume that would be the SDK? and not the full Visual Studio.NET
package.
-----Original Message-----
From: Yu, Kevin [mailto:kyu@N...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 2:57 PM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] Re: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
and the good thing is asp.net will be free for download once it's released.
-----Original Message-----
From: Todd Carrico [mailto:ToddC@m...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 7:44 AM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] Re: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
You can obtain a production license for ASP.NET right now, I understand.
The ASP.NET bits are really very stable.
The community of developers is a big reason to go .NET. Much better than
what we had for ASP 2/3.
Jump in the water is fine...
tc
-----Original Message-----
From: Daniel Walker [mailto:danielw@w...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 8:31 AM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] Re: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
> 1) what advantages does it have over previouse ASP development.
It runs faster and, if properly developed, the code is cleaner and thus
easier to debug and maintain. Data access is a breeze and like all
Microsoft technologies, you can learn the basic technology very fast indeed
and get good results from it, adding further refinements later on as your
confidence grows.
> 2) is it relativly easy to migrate from ASP 2/3 to ASP.NET?
If I understand you correctly, you aren't, are you? You say you haven't
started server-side programming. Do you mean, as Mitch takes you to mean,
that you have some legacy code that will need porting or do you mean will
it be easy for ASP prograammers to learn .NET? If the latter, then it
depends on things like whether or not they have done any object-oriented
programming before. For someone like yourself, it may be a benefit to come
to .NET with a clean slate, so to speak.
> 3) and as the framework is still in it's Beta stage, would I be running
> before I can walk in respect to the technology.
The framework is due for release very shortly. It would be a good idea to
run on a test machine, for now, but it is more approriate to say that .NET
is in release-candidate stage than in beta stage.
What have you to lose? Knowing stuff never made anybody any less
employable. The desktop is dead: long live the Web application.
Daniel Walker
Wrox Press
Message #25 by Quinton Sheppard <quintons@k...> on Thu, 1 Nov 2001 17:52:15 -0000
|
|
I have Visual Studio 6.0, would this work with the .NET Archutecture?
-----Original Message-----
From: Yu, Kevin [mailto:kyu@N...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 4:28 PM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] Re: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
no. of course not, but vs.net is just s IDE.
-----Original Message-----
From: Quinton Sheppard [mailto:quintons@k...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 9:20 AM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] Re: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
and I presume that would be the SDK? and not the full Visual Studio.NET
package.
-----Original Message-----
From: Yu, Kevin [mailto:kyu@N...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 2:57 PM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] Re: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
and the good thing is asp.net will be free for download once it's released.
-----Original Message-----
From: Todd Carrico [mailto:ToddC@m...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 7:44 AM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] Re: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
You can obtain a production license for ASP.NET right now, I understand.
The ASP.NET bits are really very stable.
The community of developers is a big reason to go .NET. Much better than
what we had for ASP 2/3.
Jump in the water is fine...
tc
-----Original Message-----
From: Daniel Walker [mailto:danielw@w...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 8:31 AM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] Re: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
> 1) what advantages does it have over previouse ASP development.
It runs faster and, if properly developed, the code is cleaner and thus
easier to debug and maintain. Data access is a breeze and like all
Microsoft technologies, you can learn the basic technology very fast indeed
and get good results from it, adding further refinements later on as your
confidence grows.
> 2) is it relativly easy to migrate from ASP 2/3 to ASP.NET?
If I understand you correctly, you aren't, are you? You say you haven't
started server-side programming. Do you mean, as Mitch takes you to mean,
that you have some legacy code that will need porting or do you mean will
it be easy for ASP prograammers to learn .NET? If the latter, then it
depends on things like whether or not they have done any object-oriented
programming before. For someone like yourself, it may be a benefit to come
to .NET with a clean slate, so to speak.
> 3) and as the framework is still in it's Beta stage, would I be running
> before I can walk in respect to the technology.
The framework is due for release very shortly. It would be a good idea to
run on a test machine, for now, but it is more approriate to say that .NET
is in release-candidate stage than in beta stage.
What have you to lose? Knowing stuff never made anybody any less
employable. The desktop is dead: long live the Web application.
Daniel Walker
Wrox Press
Message #26 by "Albert Davis" <albertdavis@h...> on Thu, 01 Nov 2001 12:03:27 -0500
|
|
Not really, as VS 6.0 works against COM and Legacy ASP... You will need to
get Visual Studio.NET or some other IDE, but of course you could always use
a text editor....
Visual Studio.NET
http://msdn.microsoft.com/vstudio/nextgen/default.asp
Al
>From: Quinton Sheppard <quintons@k...>
>Reply-To: "ASP+" <aspx@p...>
>To: "ASP+" <aspx@p...>
>Subject: [aspx] Re: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
>Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2001 17:52:15 -0000
>
>I have Visual Studio 6.0, would this work with the .NET Archutecture?
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Yu, Kevin [mailto:kyu@N...]
>Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 4:28 PM
>To: ASP+
>Subject: [aspx] Re: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
>
>
>no. of course not, but vs.net is just s IDE.
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Quinton Sheppard [mailto:quintons@k...]
>Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 9:20 AM
>To: ASP+
>Subject: [aspx] Re: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
>
>
>and I presume that would be the SDK? and not the full Visual Studio.NET
>package.
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Yu, Kevin [mailto:kyu@N...]
>Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 2:57 PM
>To: ASP+
>Subject: [aspx] Re: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
>
>
>and the good thing is asp.net will be free for download once it's released.
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Todd Carrico [mailto:ToddC@m...]
>Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 7:44 AM
>To: ASP+
>Subject: [aspx] Re: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
>
>
>You can obtain a production license for ASP.NET right now, I understand.
>The ASP.NET bits are really very stable.
>
>The community of developers is a big reason to go .NET. Much better than
>what we had for ASP 2/3.
>
>Jump in the water is fine...
>
>tc
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Daniel Walker [mailto:danielw@w...]
>Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 8:31 AM
>To: ASP+
>Subject: [aspx] Re: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
>
> > 1) what advantages does it have over previouse ASP development.
>
>It runs faster and, if properly developed, the code is cleaner and thus
>easier to debug and maintain. Data access is a breeze and like all
>Microsoft technologies, you can learn the basic technology very fast indeed
>and get good results from it, adding further refinements later on as your
>confidence grows.
>
> > 2) is it relativly easy to migrate from ASP 2/3 to ASP.NET?
>
>If I understand you correctly, you aren't, are you? You say you haven't
>started server-side programming. Do you mean, as Mitch takes you to mean,
>that you have some legacy code that will need porting or do you mean will
>it be easy for ASP prograammers to learn .NET? If the latter, then it
>depends on things like whether or not they have done any object-oriented
>programming before. For someone like yourself, it may be a benefit to come
>to .NET with a clean slate, so to speak.
>
> > 3) and as the framework is still in it's Beta stage, would I be running
> > before I can walk in respect to the technology.
>
>The framework is due for release very shortly. It would be a good idea to
>run on a test machine, for now, but it is more approriate to say that .NET
>is in release-candidate stage than in beta stage.
>
>What have you to lose? Knowing stuff never made anybody any less
>employable. The desktop is dead: long live the Web application.
>
>Daniel Walker
>Wrox Press
>
>
Message #27 by Todd Carrico <ToddC@m...> on Thu, 1 Nov 2001 11:04:32 -0600
|
|
No, but notepad, ultraedit, textpad, and many others will suffice.
The SDK comes with the command line compilers, so any editor will do.
tc
-----Original Message-----
From: Quinton Sheppard [mailto:quintons@k...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 11:52 AM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] Re: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
I have Visual Studio 6.0, would this work with the .NET Archutecture?
-----Original Message-----
From: Yu, Kevin [mailto:kyu@N...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 4:28 PM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] Re: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
no. of course not, but vs.net is just s IDE.
-----Original Message-----
From: Quinton Sheppard [mailto:quintons@k...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 9:20 AM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] Re: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
and I presume that would be the SDK? and not the full Visual Studio.NET
package.
-----Original Message-----
From: Yu, Kevin [mailto:kyu@N...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 2:57 PM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] Re: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
and the good thing is asp.net will be free for download once it's released.
-----Original Message-----
From: Todd Carrico [mailto:ToddC@m...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 7:44 AM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] Re: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
You can obtain a production license for ASP.NET right now, I understand.
The ASP.NET bits are really very stable.
The community of developers is a big reason to go .NET. Much better than
what we had for ASP 2/3.
Jump in the water is fine...
tc
-----Original Message-----
From: Daniel Walker [mailto:danielw@w...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 8:31 AM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] Re: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
> 1) what advantages does it have over previouse ASP development.
It runs faster and, if properly developed, the code is cleaner and thus
easier to debug and maintain. Data access is a breeze and like all
Microsoft technologies, you can learn the basic technology very fast indeed
and get good results from it, adding further refinements later on as your
confidence grows.
> 2) is it relativly easy to migrate from ASP 2/3 to ASP.NET?
If I understand you correctly, you aren't, are you? You say you haven't
started server-side programming. Do you mean, as Mitch takes you to mean,
that you have some legacy code that will need porting or do you mean will
it be easy for ASP prograammers to learn .NET? If the latter, then it
depends on things like whether or not they have done any object-oriented
programming before. For someone like yourself, it may be a benefit to come
to .NET with a clean slate, so to speak.
> 3) and as the framework is still in it's Beta stage, would I be running
> before I can walk in respect to the technology.
The framework is due for release very shortly. It would be a good idea to
run on a test machine, for now, but it is more approriate to say that .NET
is in release-candidate stage than in beta stage.
What have you to lose? Knowing stuff never made anybody any less
employable. The desktop is dead: long live the Web application.
Daniel Walker
Wrox Press
Message #28 by "Arbon Reimer" <arbon_reimer@h...> on Thu, 1 Nov 2001 11:04:16 -0700
|
|
Can anyone speculate as to Macromedia's development of an IDE like
Dreamweaver UltraDev that will work with .NET web application
development? Or any other .NET development for that matter?
-----Original Message-----
From: Todd Carrico [mailto:ToddC@m...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 10:05 AM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] Re: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
No, but notepad, ultraedit, textpad, and many others will suffice.
The SDK comes with the command line compilers, so any editor will do.
tc
-----Original Message-----
From: Quinton Sheppard [mailto:quintons@k...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 11:52 AM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] Re: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
I have Visual Studio 6.0, would this work with the .NET Archutecture?
-----Original Message-----
From: Yu, Kevin [mailto:kyu@N...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 4:28 PM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] Re: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
no. of course not, but vs.net is just s IDE.
-----Original Message-----
From: Quinton Sheppard [mailto:quintons@k...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 9:20 AM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] Re: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
and I presume that would be the SDK? and not the full Visual Studio.NET
package.
-----Original Message-----
From: Yu, Kevin [mailto:kyu@N...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 2:57 PM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] Re: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
and the good thing is asp.net will be free for download once it's
released.
-----Original Message-----
From: Todd Carrico [mailto:ToddC@m...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 7:44 AM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] Re: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
You can obtain a production license for ASP.NET right now, I understand.
The ASP.NET bits are really very stable.
The community of developers is a big reason to go .NET. Much better
than what we had for ASP 2/3.
Jump in the water is fine...
tc
-----Original Message-----
From: Daniel Walker [mailto:danielw@w...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 8:31 AM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] Re: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
> 1) what advantages does it have over previouse ASP development.
It runs faster and, if properly developed, the code is cleaner and thus
easier to debug and maintain. Data access is a breeze and like all
Microsoft technologies, you can learn the basic technology very fast
indeed and get good results from it, adding further refinements later on
as your confidence grows.
> 2) is it relativly easy to migrate from ASP 2/3 to ASP.NET?
If I understand you correctly, you aren't, are you? You say you haven't
started server-side programming. Do you mean, as Mitch takes you to
mean, that you have some legacy code that will need porting or do you
mean will it be easy for ASP prograammers to learn .NET? If the latter,
then it depends on things like whether or not they have done any
object-oriented programming before. For someone like yourself, it may be
a benefit to come to .NET with a clean slate, so to speak.
> 3) and as the framework is still in it's Beta stage, would I be
> running before I can walk in respect to the technology.
The framework is due for release very shortly. It would be a good idea
to run on a test machine, for now, but it is more approriate to say that
.NET is in release-candidate stage than in beta stage.
What have you to lose? Knowing stuff never made anybody any less
employable. The desktop is dead: long live the Web application.
Daniel Walker
Wrox Press
ail.Unsub')
Message #29 by "Joe Jones" <joejo@m...> on Thu, 1 Nov 2001 10:29:41 -0800
|
|
It also comes with a terrific GUI Debugger. The only thing missing from
the SDK is IntelliSense support (obviously). Really, this is the crack
that was hard for me to wean off when I decided to stop using VS.Net
(for various reasons).
Joe
-----Original Message-----
From: Todd Carrico [mailto:ToddC@m...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 9:05 AM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] Re: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
No, but notepad, ultraedit, textpad, and many others will suffice.
The SDK comes with the command line compilers, so any editor will do.
tc
-----Original Message-----
From: Quinton Sheppard [mailto:quintons@k...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 11:52 AM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] Re: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
I have Visual Studio 6.0, would this work with the .NET Archutecture?
-----Original Message-----
From: Yu, Kevin [mailto:kyu@N...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 4:28 PM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] Re: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
no. of course not, but vs.net is just s IDE.
-----Original Message-----
From: Quinton Sheppard [mailto:quintons@k...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 9:20 AM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] Re: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
and I presume that would be the SDK? and not the full Visual Studio.NET
package.
-----Original Message-----
From: Yu, Kevin [mailto:kyu@N...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 2:57 PM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] Re: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
and the good thing is asp.net will be free for download once it's
released.
-----Original Message-----
From: Todd Carrico [mailto:ToddC@m...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 7:44 AM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] Re: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
You can obtain a production license for ASP.NET right now, I understand.
The ASP.NET bits are really very stable.
The community of developers is a big reason to go .NET. Much better
than what we had for ASP 2/3.
Jump in the water is fine...
tc
-----Original Message-----
From: Daniel Walker [mailto:danielw@w...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 8:31 AM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] Re: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
> 1) what advantages does it have over previouse ASP development.
It runs faster and, if properly developed, the code is cleaner and thus
easier to debug and maintain. Data access is a breeze and like all
Microsoft technologies, you can learn the basic technology very fast
indeed and get good results from it, adding further refinements later on
as your confidence grows.
> 2) is it relativly easy to migrate from ASP 2/3 to ASP.NET?
If I understand you correctly, you aren't, are you? You say you haven't
started server-side programming. Do you mean, as Mitch takes you to
mean, that you have some legacy code that will need porting or do you
mean will it be easy for ASP prograammers to learn .NET? If the latter,
then it depends on things like whether or not they have done any
object-oriented programming before. For someone like yourself, it may be
a benefit to come to .NET with a clean slate, so to speak.
> 3) and as the framework is still in it's Beta stage, would I be
> running
> before I can walk in respect to the technology.
The framework is due for release very shortly. It would be a good idea
to run on a test machine, for now, but it is more approriate to say that
.NET is in release-candidate stage than in beta stage.
What have you to lose? Knowing stuff never made anybody any less
employable. The desktop is dead: long live the Web application.
Daniel Walker
Wrox Press
Message #30 by "Yu, Kevin" <kyu@N...> on Thu, 1 Nov 2001 13:33:53 -0500
|
|
no. it's totally different in the way it make how the language intercoporate
with
each other. for example,you can write a class in c# and inherited by vb
class.
-----Original Message-----
From: Quinton Sheppard [mailto:quintons@k...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 10:52 AM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] Re: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
I have Visual Studio 6.0, would this work with the .NET Archutecture?
-----Original Message-----
From: Yu, Kevin [mailto:kyu@N...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 4:28 PM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] Re: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
no. of course not, but vs.net is just s IDE.
-----Original Message-----
From: Quinton Sheppard [mailto:quintons@k...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 9:20 AM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] Re: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
and I presume that would be the SDK? and not the full Visual Studio.NET
package.
-----Original Message-----
From: Yu, Kevin [mailto:kyu@N...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 2:57 PM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] Re: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
and the good thing is asp.net will be free for download once it's released.
-----Original Message-----
From: Todd Carrico [mailto:ToddC@m...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 7:44 AM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] Re: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
You can obtain a production license for ASP.NET right now, I understand.
The ASP.NET bits are really very stable.
The community of developers is a big reason to go .NET. Much better than
what we had for ASP 2/3.
Jump in the water is fine...
tc
-----Original Message-----
From: Daniel Walker [mailto:danielw@w...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 8:31 AM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] Re: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
> 1) what advantages does it have over previouse ASP development.
It runs faster and, if properly developed, the code is cleaner and thus
easier to debug and maintain. Data access is a breeze and like all
Microsoft technologies, you can learn the basic technology very fast indeed
and get good results from it, adding further refinements later on as your
confidence grows.
> 2) is it relativly easy to migrate from ASP 2/3 to ASP.NET?
If I understand you correctly, you aren't, are you? You say you haven't
started server-side programming. Do you mean, as Mitch takes you to mean,
that you have some legacy code that will need porting or do you mean will
it be easy for ASP prograammers to learn .NET? If the latter, then it
depends on things like whether or not they have done any object-oriented
programming before. For someone like yourself, it may be a benefit to come
to .NET with a clean slate, so to speak.
> 3) and as the framework is still in it's Beta stage, would I be running
> before I can walk in respect to the technology.
The framework is due for release very shortly. It would be a good idea to
run on a test machine, for now, but it is more approriate to say that .NET
is in release-candidate stage than in beta stage.
What have you to lose? Knowing stuff never made anybody any less
employable. The desktop is dead: long live the Web application.
Daniel Walker
Wrox Press
Message #31 by Quinton Sheppard <quintons@k...> on Thu, 1 Nov 2001 21:51:40 -0000
|
|
I feel that it will be taken on, just as they support Coldfusion, PHP and
ASP. it is inevitable.
-----Original Message-----
From: Arbon Reimer [mailto:arbon_reimer@h...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 6:04 PM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] Re: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
Can anyone speculate as to Macromedia's development of an IDE like
Dreamweaver UltraDev that will work with .NET web application
development? Or any other .NET development for that matter?
-----Original Message-----
From: Todd Carrico [mailto:ToddC@m...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 10:05 AM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] Re: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
No, but notepad, ultraedit, textpad, and many others will suffice.
The SDK comes with the command line compilers, so any editor will do.
tc
-----Original Message-----
From: Quinton Sheppard [mailto:quintons@k...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 11:52 AM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] Re: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
I have Visual Studio 6.0, would this work with the .NET Archutecture?
-----Original Message-----
From: Yu, Kevin [mailto:kyu@N...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 4:28 PM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] Re: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
no. of course not, but vs.net is just s IDE.
-----Original Message-----
From: Quinton Sheppard [mailto:quintons@k...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 9:20 AM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] Re: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
and I presume that would be the SDK? and not the full Visual Studio.NET
package.
-----Original Message-----
From: Yu, Kevin [mailto:kyu@N...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 2:57 PM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] Re: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
and the good thing is asp.net will be free for download once it's
released.
-----Original Message-----
From: Todd Carrico [mailto:ToddC@m...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 7:44 AM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] Re: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
You can obtain a production license for ASP.NET right now, I understand.
The ASP.NET bits are really very stable.
The community of developers is a big reason to go .NET. Much better
than what we had for ASP 2/3.
Jump in the water is fine...
tc
-----Original Message-----
From: Daniel Walker [mailto:danielw@w...]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 8:31 AM
To: ASP+
Subject: [aspx] Re: to .Net or not to .Net, that is the question.
> 1) what advantages does it have over previouse ASP development.
It runs faster and, if properly developed, the code is cleaner and thus
easier to debug and maintain. Data access is a breeze and like all
Microsoft technologies, you can learn the basic technology very fast
indeed and get good results from it, adding further refinements later on
as your confidence grows.
> 2) is it relativly easy to migrate from ASP 2/3 to ASP.NET?
If I understand you correctly, you aren't, are you? You say you haven't
started server-side programming. Do you mean, as Mitch takes you to
mean, that you have some legacy code that will need porting or do you
mean will it be easy for ASP prograammers to learn .NET? If the latter,
then it depends on things like whether or not they have done any
object-oriented programming before. For someone like yourself, it may be
a benefit to come to .NET with a clean slate, so to speak.
> 3) and as the framework is still in it's Beta stage, would I be
> running before I can walk in respect to the technology.
The framework is due for release very shortly. It would be a good idea
to run on a test machine, for now, but it is more approriate to say that
.NET is in release-candidate stage than in beta stage.
What have you to lose? Knowing stuff never made anybody any less
employable. The desktop is dead: long live the Web application.
Daniel Walker
Wrox Press
| |
View Cart
