|
Sponsored Links
Resources
.NET Research Library
Get .NET related white papers, case studies and webcasts
|
News
News
News
|
Messages: 13
Messages: 13
Messages: 13
Printer friendly
Printer friendly
Printer friendly
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
XML
XML
XML
|
 |
Should you skip .NET 2.0 altogether?
Last month Jesse Ezell wrote a blog post with a title -- Screw 2.0, I'm Going Straight to 3.0 -- that pretty much said it all.
Ezell notes that Windows Vista will ship with the .NET Framework 3.0 and that there are several Windows Presentation Foundation "killer apps" already out there. He continues:
[N]ot only will you have Vista installs pushing the .NET framework 3.0 adoption rate much faster than any previous .NET framework release, but you'll also have a lot more people building apps that are designed for the 3.0 framework than the 2.0 framework. My guess, within a year or so, we will see more people with the 3.0 framework installed on their machines than have the 2.0 framework installed today....So, why write for the 2.0 framework when 3.0 gives me a lot more bang for my buck and its adoption will quickly surpass 2.0 adoption anyway?
Responses to this entry indicate that it's not as easy as Ezell makes it out to be. "Unless you're developing for WPF, 3.0 *is* 2.0," one commenter writes, referring to the fact that .NET 3.0 uses the exact same ADO.NET, ASP.NET and CLR as .NET 2.0.
Another commenter says we'll have to wait for .NET 3.1 and WPF 1.1 before knowing if Ezell is right. "If they appear in the same old monolithic form (as opposed to being, say, small-ish patches) then we are back to square one on the deployment front," he writes.
Read Screw 2.0, I'm Going Straight to 3.0
|
|
|
Message #222921
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Re: Should you skip .NET 2.0 altogether?
Simple answer.. no! I've not seen a user-interface as appealing as Vista since.. a Mac in 1986
.. never bought a Mac.. because the UI just didn't add enough to justify it...
Vista will only pickup with (a) major desktop replacement, (b) Longhorn server
is established, (c) 64-bit migration
|
|
|
Message #222923
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Re: Should you skip .NET 2.0 altogether?
Skip 2.0 Alltogether?
well that's a non sequitur...
Now I will be the first to admit that microsoft's (re)naming of WinFX to .Net 3.0 is Teh Suck. However the WinFX technologies ARE .Net 2.0 applications themselves! They should have called them the .Net 2.0 Option Pack or something more aligned with their true nature as a superset.
|
|
|
Message #222924
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Re: Should you skip .NET 2.0 altogether?
His blog entry is based around .net 3.0 being more ubiquitous than 2.0 in the future. I think Jesse missed the fact that 2.0 is a pre-requisite to installing 3.0.
|
|
|
Message #222927
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Hop , Skip and Jump
I think you have hit the nail on the head. Plus the release of .NET 3.0 is so timely , its going to be compelling reason for lots of companies to skip 2.0 all together and jump to 3.0 directly. From technical point, I am not worried because I know techies can make it happen no matter what. I am confident about techies. I have been on product side where our clients did make those hop, skip and jump over decisions and we were like "yikes ... wooooooo" and people actually doing the migration work, end up doing it anyway. Even from budgeting, IT investment,ROI standpoint and ensuring there are no distruptions on the .NET based apps, I think companies and management are going to think, why do it twice(1.1 --> 2.0 -->3.0) and cause double headaches when we can wait it out for 3.0 and do a hop skip to 3.0 .
So more than likely IT shops would go direct to 3.0 if they have not done the .net 2.0 specific implementations.
|
|
|
Message #222928
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Re: Should you skip .NET 2.0 altogether?
You call this news?
Headline: Some loser doesn't get it. More at 11.
With all the stuff going on these days, is this really the best youo can do?
|
|
|
Message #222933
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Re: Should you skip .NET 2.0 altogether?
This is all not major stuff if not useless.. I don’t know why Microsoft has created such a hype although these are not major things.. so that you should have a whole new version of framework (which is not by the way), they must have just release the runtimes for WPF/WCF/WF and that’s it.. and same with Vista, where i don’t see any major feature except an advancements in UI which makes your pc damn slow, i cant switch to vista just because of flashy stuff while compromising on performance.. Simply not acceptable..
|
|
|
Message #222941
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Why not…
Why not…
In addition to the cost benefits of incurring one hop/migration (1.1-->2.0&3.0), instead of two (1.1-->2.0-->3.0), there is definitely more to .NET 3.0 than just WPF, especially for the middle/back end types. Personally, WWF will be a more welcome “addition” to the framework.
|
|
|
Message #222942
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Mystery post
This whole article is somewhat of a mystery to me. It is based on several assumptions that I don't believe in.
"[N]ot only will you have Vista installs pushing the .NET framework 3.0 adoption rate much faster than any previous .NET framework release, but you'll also have a lot more people building apps that are designed for the 3.0 framework than the 2.0 framework."
I honestly don't see any compelling reason why any professional organization should spend the bucks to migrate their IT-environment and their staff to an OS that gives them close to no business value. Ms has greatly overestimated the value of Vista for their customers. That type of investment just does not hold water compared to other alternative IT-investments that are long overdue for many companies. Therefore, Vista will not drive the adoption of the .NET "3.0" FW (and BTW, it should have been named 2.1 to avoid confusion).
I think that the home PC market will have the fastest adopters of Vista just because they like eye candy and they get Vista pre-installed when they buy a box.
Vista aside, I also believe that there are very few technical reasons to adopt .NET for the mainstream scenarios. The only clear reasons I see (so far) for adopting "3.0" is if you really need any of the following:
- WinFX (might be cool for the home PC user, but adds no real business value for a professional org)
- Workflow support (very good for the process oriented applications out there, but they are a minority)
- The new threading model (excellent if you are into high performance server applications, which is also a minority)
Based on the above I belive that migration from 1.1 -> 2.0 (and staying there) will be by far the most common IT strategy that is adopted, at least for a couple of years).
|
|
|
Message #222968
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Re: Mystery post
Therefore, Vista will not drive the adoption of the .NET "3.0" FW (and BTW, it should have been named 2.1 to avoid confusion).
Looks to me it should be the other way around, i.e. Microsoft named .NET 2.1 to .NET 3.0 to drive the adoption of Vista by corporate customers.
|
|
|
Message #222976
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Re: Should you skip .NET 2.0 altogether?
The pieces of .Net 3.0 are just extensions to .Net 2.0 (they are very powerful extensions, but they are not really deserving of a new framework number). So if you are going to use .Net 3.0 technologies you are really just using another layer of powerful .Net 2.0 libraries. Hence going to 3.0 isn't skipping .Net 2.0, so this question breaks down...
|
|
|
Message #222977
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
duh
anyone who has actually used 3.0 and 2.0 knows that 3.0 sits on top of the 2.0 Framework. so when you say you are going to skip 2.0 you are really saying "I have no idea what I am talking about". 3.0 does not exist without 2.0 underneath.
looks like MOST people here get that, except for the person that wrote the article. must be that person hasn't gotten around to actually using it and is confused by the artificial and unfounded "3.0" hype.
|
|
|
Message #222982
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
3.0 sans 2.0 - Nobody think so - 2.0 Plus mocha..oh yeah
Did I read your message saying that 3.0 does not exist without 2.0.. hmmm . Isn't 3.0 an extension on top of 2.0? Ofcourse it it. So wont somebody who is running a mixed breed of apps 1.1 and 2.0, would have choice to make between going from 1.1 to 2.0 and then apply extenstions to it or do 1.1 to 3.0(vista based and assume all the base 2.0 libs are in there in it) ? I think thats a valid question for IT management to consider.
I am sure, IT managers would be pondering that "skip" question while techies keep arguing out that 3.0 is all Vista hype and that 3.0 is nothing but 2.0 with some whip cream on 2.0. The very fact that it has got some whip cream on top would make IT management think , its mocha in there. And since there would be marketting hype and drum rolls with 3.0 it will make people ponder that hop, skip and jump.
|
|
|
Message #223179
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Debate too generic
It really isn't an issue of 2.0 versus 3.0.
It's WCF versus Remoting 2.0 or WSE 3.0...
Or WPF versus traditional WinForms...
Or WF versus rolling your own workflow...
If IT managers are pondering 2.0 versus 3.0, then really they haven't done enough research.
|
|
|
| |
|
| New content on TheServerSide.NETNew content on TheServerSide.NETNew content on TheServerSide.NET |
|
|
Language "mashups" will become more prominent, and developers will become polyglots, one programmer suggests.
SearchWinDevelopment.com offers an introduction to the language, performance, testing and data management improvements in VS 2008.
VBCode.com code snippets cover all aspects of application development, from data binding to security to the user interface.
Get up to date on XAML best practices with a variety of articles, tutorials and webcasts. [SearchWinDevelopment.com]
One team's experience with the VSTS DB edition suggests that it can improve workflow for dev teams. It also enhanced Agile efforts.
(June 24, Article)
Microsoft has begun to include DSL tools in the VSTS kit. A new book by Steve Cook and other VSTS team members helps set the stage.
(June 24, Article)
Cartoon: Be it ever so humble there is no place like your home after you get a Microsoft Home Server .
(June 18, Cartoon)
Microsoft's Thom Robbins says new technology to highlight in NET 3.5 includes AJAX, LINQ for both C# and VB, as well as tooling enhancements intended to ease the task of building WPF, WF and WCF apps.
(June 29, Podcast)
Venkat Subramaniam discusses AJAX bottlenecks, the tenets of Agile development and more. He spoke at the Ajax Experience.
(June 25, Tech Talk)
In the second of a two-part series, Michele Leroux Bustamente discusses design decisions related to the claims-based security model. Read the story and walk through the process for creating a set of claims-based utilities to encapsulate claims authorization at the service tier.
(May 24, Article)
Understanding why the Entity Framework exists and learning where it can fit into your projects can get you prepared for the eventual release early next year.
(May 10, Article)
Resource: This learning guide gives you quick access to useful links on Windows Communication Foundation security information.
(April 24, Article)
TSS.NET's Jack Vaughan spoke recently spoke with Microsoft's Brad Abrams to find out what he is seeing in the field and what the chefs in Redmond are cooking. Along the way he discusses patterns of AJAX frameworks.
(April 11, Article)
In a two-part series, Michele Leroux Bustamente explains how claims-based security is supported by WCF, and how you can implement a claims-based security model for your services.
(March 29, Article)
Windows Workflow Foundation is a new technology that many developers will need to get their heads around. In a brief excerpt adapted from Programming Windows Workflow Foundation: Practical WF Techniques and Examples using XAML and C#, K.Scott Allen considers aspects of workflow definition.
(March 22, Chapter Excerpt)
|
|
