Josef Rogovsky
Top achievements
Rank 2
Rank 2
Josef Rogovsky
asked on 25 Jun 2006, 09:41 AM
I'd guess that this is going to hit along with .Net 3.0, which is going to be released along with Windows Vista later this year.
I haven't seen any ASP.Net specific info though, just a lot of WinFx info.
Anybody got any good resources for this?
I spent much of my free time in the year prior to .Net 2.0's release trying to get up to speed with ASP.Net 2.0 and I still felt overwhelmed when it was released.
ASP.Net 2.0 still feels brand new to me and it's kind of intimidating to think that it's going to be replaced in about 6 months.
I haven't seen any ASP.Net specific info though, just a lot of WinFx info.
Anybody got any good resources for this?
I spent much of my free time in the year prior to .Net 2.0's release trying to get up to speed with ASP.Net 2.0 and I still felt overwhelmed when it was released.
ASP.Net 2.0 still feels brand new to me and it's kind of intimidating to think that it's going to be replaced in about 6 months.
8 Answers, 1 is accepted
0
Robert Swafford
Top achievements
Rank 1
Rank 1
answered on 27 Jun 2006, 01:23 PM
I agree... IMHO, completely replacing code frameworks every year is not a good thing. Developers need time to learn the framework and get comfortable with it before they deploy anything, and in a lot of cases, a year just isn't long enough. If I'm not mistaken, .NET 1.0 and 1.1 were out for 2 years each before the next version of .NET came out, and the jump from 1.0 to 1.1 was not that big of a deal, just a service pack more or less. 4 years may be a bit long in between releases, but its certainly a better timeframe than just 1 year.
As neat as .NET 3.0 might be, I don't think I'll be moving to it for a while, simply because my company has already invested a good deal of time and energy to developing a couple ASP.NET 2.0 applications, and I don't want to think about the compatibility issues that I'm sure Microsoft will introduce.
That said, no, I don't have any concrete information about 3.0, but I am curious to see how this plays out...
As neat as .NET 3.0 might be, I don't think I'll be moving to it for a while, simply because my company has already invested a good deal of time and energy to developing a couple ASP.NET 2.0 applications, and I don't want to think about the compatibility issues that I'm sure Microsoft will introduce.
That said, no, I don't have any concrete information about 3.0, but I am curious to see how this plays out...
0
Shaun Peet
Top achievements
Rank 2
Rank 2
answered on 27 Jun 2006, 01:46 PM
I agree...
When I first saw that there was .NET 3.0 in the works; and close to a release date even, I was a bit disapponted. Particularly given the huge delay in the .NET 2.0 release and its subsequant hyping - now that it's out I've made huge committments to it. For everyone's sake; hopefully the 3.0 release gets delayed over a year as well but since there's a beta already out there somehow I doubt this is going to happen.
Boo Hiss on Microsoft (until we know more details; or unless they plan to cuddle with us through another migration process).
When I first saw that there was .NET 3.0 in the works; and close to a release date even, I was a bit disapponted. Particularly given the huge delay in the .NET 2.0 release and its subsequant hyping - now that it's out I've made huge committments to it. For everyone's sake; hopefully the 3.0 release gets delayed over a year as well but since there's a beta already out there somehow I doubt this is going to happen.
Boo Hiss on Microsoft (until we know more details; or unless they plan to cuddle with us through another migration process).
0
Josef Rogovsky
Top achievements
Rank 2
Rank 2
answered on 07 Jul 2006, 08:49 AM
Stephen Walther, the guy who wrote "ASP.Net Unleashed" (almost everyone's favorite book on ASP.Net) has a blog on his site superexpert.com.
In his post advertising the release of "ASP.Net 2.0 Unleashed" I posted a comment asking what he knew about ASP.Net 3.0.
Here's his response:
Hi Josef,
The rename of WinFx to .NET 3.0 was done purely for reasons of branding. The .NET 3.0 Framework will still use the .NET 2.0 CLR. You can read more about this at:
http://blogs.msdn.com/jasonz/archive/2006/06/09/624629.aspx
I'm working on a new book on Microsoft Atlas. Atlas is Microsoft's implementation of AJAX. It is the next major evolution of ASP.NET.
After reading the MSDN blog entry (and all the associated comments) that he linked, I feel a lot better about the situation.
It seems a lot of devs are unhappy that Microsoft has done this for what seems to be marketing reasons only. It's not like us devs would be confused by having multiple frameworks (ie., a separate framework for WPF/WinFX) or the renaming/rebranding would inspire us to be early adopters.
I guess the real .Net 3.0 is going to be called 3.5. ;)
In his post advertising the release of "ASP.Net 2.0 Unleashed" I posted a comment asking what he knew about ASP.Net 3.0.
Here's his response:
Hi Josef,
The rename of WinFx to .NET 3.0 was done purely for reasons of branding. The .NET 3.0 Framework will still use the .NET 2.0 CLR. You can read more about this at:
http://blogs.msdn.com/jasonz/archive/2006/06/09/624629.aspx
I'm working on a new book on Microsoft Atlas. Atlas is Microsoft's implementation of AJAX. It is the next major evolution of ASP.NET.
After reading the MSDN blog entry (and all the associated comments) that he linked, I feel a lot better about the situation.
It seems a lot of devs are unhappy that Microsoft has done this for what seems to be marketing reasons only. It's not like us devs would be confused by having multiple frameworks (ie., a separate framework for WPF/WinFX) or the renaming/rebranding would inspire us to be early adopters.
I guess the real .Net 3.0 is going to be called 3.5. ;)
0
Alex Norcliffe
Top achievements
Rank 1
Rank 1
answered on 13 Jul 2006, 12:46 PM
There has been great confusion in the industry and this post demonstrates exactly the core of the problem at hand - MS are releasing it as .NET 3.0 when in fact all that is happening is that they are releasing WinFX tagged onto the existing .NET 2.0, so it's an extension - there won't be ANY updates to ANY existing parts of the .NET 2.0 core, in fact the compilers will all remain the same and even the files will have the same version number!
It's very confusing at first but ultimately it's not going to change, I think it's marketing hype winning over community feedback.
Thank god Telerik don't do that kind of thing! ...
It's very confusing at first but ultimately it's not going to change, I think it's marketing hype winning over community feedback.
Thank god Telerik don't do that kind of thing! ...
0
True, Alex, we are not overly aggressive with our marketing activities, and it seems this pays off. All we want is one to see the ad, and to come and download the suite. We have found that our work is more appreciated when one is not "pushed" to try it, but rather he/she finds that the controls are indeed good.
As to .NET3, it is less work for us, I guess :)
Sincerely yours,
Rob
the telerik team
As to .NET3, it is less work for us, I guess :)
Sincerely yours,
Rob
the telerik team
0
Todd Anglin
Top achievements
Rank 2
Rank 2
answered on 13 Jul 2006, 05:53 PM
Since ".NET 3.0" is in fact only an add-on of sorts to the .NET 2.0 framework, will it have any effect on the telerik WinForms and Reporting efforts? I know your WinForms controls have made mention of WPF a few times and I'm curious how 3.0 will play into those plans.
Thanks~
0
Hi Todd,
Yes, we are thinking ahead of time and preparing the new Reporting and especially the Windows Forms product lines for the upcoming WPF and .NET 3.0 releases. We are doing our best to develop a framework which although running on .NET 2.0 will be easy to port to WPF and .NET 3.0. We have already implemented some of the best practices from the new frameworks and we will be happy to hear your feedback on them once we have the betas out.
All the best,
Ivo
the telerik team
Yes, we are thinking ahead of time and preparing the new Reporting and especially the Windows Forms product lines for the upcoming WPF and .NET 3.0 releases. We are doing our best to develop a framework which although running on .NET 2.0 will be easy to port to WPF and .NET 3.0. We have already implemented some of the best practices from the new frameworks and we will be happy to hear your feedback on them once we have the betas out.
All the best,
Ivo
the telerik team
0
Larkin Young
Top achievements
Rank 2
Rank 2
answered on 04 Aug 2006, 12:25 PM
I definitely agree with the general consensus here--MS blundered by going with the .Net 3.0 tag, especially considering all the ballyhoo (who even uses that word anymore?) about them trying to slap ".Net" onto every product in some way. I don't think they are making enough of an effort to emphasize the fact that .Net 3.0 is nothing more than a set of "extensions" to the existing 2.0 framework, or another set of APIs, if you want to call it that.
Personally, I am excited about Windows Workflow Foundation and Windows Communication Foundation; I think they could prove to be quite huge. My project team is working to implement a set of custom activity libraries and workflow services using WWF to plug into a set of enterprise content management services we are developing for government clients. Workflow is always a touchy area; you either pay premium cost for a solution that is robust but too business domain-specific, or you get a flimsy solution that doesn't do half of what you need it to. Not surprisingly, I run across government agencies that are using Outlook for their records management..simply brilliant.
Personally, I am excited about Windows Workflow Foundation and Windows Communication Foundation; I think they could prove to be quite huge. My project team is working to implement a set of custom activity libraries and workflow services using WWF to plug into a set of enterprise content management services we are developing for government clients. Workflow is always a touchy area; you either pay premium cost for a solution that is robust but too business domain-specific, or you get a flimsy solution that doesn't do half of what you need it to. Not surprisingly, I run across government agencies that are using Outlook for their records management..simply brilliant.