Sorry for the weird question.
I'm new to web development (spent the last few years in server side programming).
I'm suppose to write a small web site that will be accessible from the internet and suppose to have users management.
Currently I tend to use the ASP.NET login mechanism (using logic control, etc').
I have two simple questions:
1. Is it something "respected" ASP.NET web sites use?
2. Is it safe enough for the common web site?
Thanks a lot.
The built-in one is fine when you're just building the site and want a quick login page for now that works. It's perfectly safe - probably safer than anything you could build yourself, but I don't know of any "real world" sites that use it...
I have yet to build a single site where I have left it in-place, because there's always going to be a situation where you want to do something it doesn't cater for (for example: it uses a <table> which is a pain to style and frowned upon anyway).
Haven't seen it a lot on big pages, but it's just nice for a common web site. Nothing to worry about safety. But I always create my own login page/form anyway. If you have time, make your own, if you don't, just use the one.
Related
I've built several database driven web sites with ASP and I'm trying to migrate the basic functionality to an ASP.NET architecture.
I want to have each link in my navigation tree correspond to a different function that will step a user through various requests and provide sequential database driven responses and possible follow-up questions. I typically do this in ASP by using the query string to execute different parts of the code in an SSI file. Each link in my navigation tree basically calls a different SSI file.
In ASP.NET I think I have a pretty good handle on web form basics, data binding, site navigation tools and master pages, but I'm having trouble with the overall design picture.
Do I want to have each link redirecting the user to different pages? My understanding is that ASP.NET is much better at maintaining state information and so I shouldn't have to rely on the query string to keep passing values to an SSI file to do sequential parts of each task.
Should I be using BLL and DAL to do this and/or stored procedures and managed code? Or could I do this sort of thing more simply with ASP.NET web pages, as opposed to web forms?
Feedback that would include a reference article and/or web example would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!
You don't necessarily have to abandon your whole way of thinking and take up ASP.NET Web Forms.
I've been making sites with ASP.NET Web Forms since it came out in 2001. But I think ASP.NET MVC would be an easier transition for you. I mean, some things are more difficult in MVC than in Web Forms. But on the whole, MVC will promote more web friendly practices and it's what I prefer now.
For example, the whole idea of postbacks and viewstate in Web Forms certainly makes a lot of things easier. But they also have a problem of hurting SEO and breaking the back button. MVC doesn't rely on any of this and it's easier to refine the user experience with the way form posts, redirects, and URLs are handled.
I wrote an article awhile back comparing MVC vs Web Forms...
http://swortham.blogspot.com/2009/10/when-to-use-aspnet-web-forms-and-when.html
Based on what I'm seeing, it looks like you've got wizard-style navigation across multiple ASP pages, and you want to have wizard-style navigation in an ASP.NET (WebForms not MVC) site.
If I'm misunderstanding this, I'll gladly delete this answer.
I'd recommend the Wizard control, (Video demos available all over the place) which will provide such an interface in one page, reducing a lot of the complexity. there's no need to keep track of variables across pages - it's all in one page, and therefore always accessible.
Wizard pages do tend to have a LOT of code and markup, but the trade-off is that all of the wizard functionality is in one pace, not scattered across files, and it's inherently obvious what's happening at each step. With the multiple-file approach, a maintenance developer needs to trace which page posts to which page and spend more time understanding the design.
The article on MVC vs Web Forms was quite interesting, although after looking at a few training videos I got the impression that the coding is quite a bit different from ASP. (Most of the examples I also see involve C#, although I have seen a few with VB, which is preferred since I'm already learning a lot of new things in a short time.) Also, I wonder if MVC will let me use the validation tools, which will be quite necessary in a different aspect of this project that involves several different and quite long forms. Given that I've invested a fair amount of time in learning about ASP.NET, I'm wondering if I should just go the extra mile (or two) and learn how to create business objects (BLL) and a data layer (DAL).
I have been looking at ASP.Net Web Pages and I think it would be a good replacement for some classic asp sites I am working on. There is a lot about them that is similar to how classic asp did things, so I believe there is a chance I can drag the other programmers into the present. My problem is that I have yet been able to find any indepth documentation to see if there is any "gotchas" I need to be aware of if I choose to go down this path. So if anyone knows of any, I could really use that information. I think going straight to MVC and Web Forms would be a bridge too far for the others at the moment. Thanks.
Wade
I found a link from Mike Brind - should I use WebMatrix to build a real-world website?
I'd suggest that Web Pages as a framework is probably the best next step you can take, but I would also advise that at least one person in the team takes time to understand the basics behind the MVC pattern. You may decide it's too much for the majority of the team at the moment, and that's fair enough, but you can use your knowledge to plan the development of the Web Pages site so that it can be more easily converted to MVC at some stage in the future, should you decide that's the way to go.
The things I would look at (coming from a classic ASP background myself) are functions and helpers. Decide on a data access strategy - The Entity Framework works well with Web Pages and can be transferred to MVC easily. Avoid the Database helper. Use Visual Web Developer 2010 SP1 for the Intellisense option.
As Knox said, you have the whole of the ASP.NET framework available to you so there should be no Web Pages specific "gotchas", and it's a massive step up from classic ASP.
I've been using Webmatrix/WebPages/Razor for a while now and like it. It's been a while since I used Classic ASP, but WebPages to me feels like a true successor to classic asp and what ASP.net should have been from the start. I'm actually moving most of my smaller sites to the WebPages framework from WebForms. Here are some things I've encountered.
I'm not sure if this is a gotcha or not, but I thought I would mention that with WebPages the scope of your variables may behave differently. I know a lot of Classic ASP sites that used to use include files to run snippets of code. Many of them depended on global variables set in the parent document. In WebPages, if you use RenderPage or Helpers to replace includes they run mostly outside of the Parent's scope. If you used Server.Execute instead of includes then you might not notice much difference, but if you did use includes and lots of global variables you may notice it.
Another possible gotcha is in ClassicASP <%=%> doesn't encode output, but in WebPages the Razor syntax # encodes output by default.
Another thing to consider is using C# vs VB.net with Webpages. Although vb.net works you'll find that most samples, tutorials and people in forums use C#.
Finally something that bothers me is that it is named the "webpages" framework. I've found it hard to do a good Google search using the term "webpages". Even "asp.net webpages" brings back mostly webform results. I have more success using "webmatrix" or "razor".
Can't recommend any documentation but here is an introduction to Web Matrix on mikesdotnetting.com blog where he has blogged quite a lot about Web Pages with Web Matrix.
We have two production sites, developed using Web Matrix. One serves our customers, the other is an intranet for our staff. They've been running in production for almost a year. I'd say about 95% of the sites were developed purely in WebMatrix IDE with about 5% going into Visual Studio, especially for the occassional obscure debugging. We're happy with WebMatrix / Web Pages. I didn't use WebForms because I was concerned about WebForm's ability to do really lightweight pages, since many of our users are using cellular data on iPads or iPhones. I didn't use MVC because of the additional complexity, since many of our pages are just showing the user read-only data from our production database. Because WebMatrix gives you access to the complete ASP.NET library, I haven't felt held back at all.
We are currently converting our ASP pages to Web Matrix. We tried to do conversions using WebForms a few years ago, only ending in frustration. After a small learning curve on the C# and Razor syntax, our development staff feel that we made a correct decision in going with Web Matrix.
I have a portfolio made in C#/ASP.NET which started off small but, as it is selling myself, it has grown in size very quickly.
I started off with using ASP.NET webforms model but this has meant that some of my code is in class libraries (.dlls) and some in page codebehind.
I want to fix this (no defined stucture), but without the overhead of migrating to ASP.NET MVC or WCSF.
How could I address these problems? I am thinking of moving all logic to WCF services and calling them from page codebehind. Is there a better way?
EDIT: The current problem is codebehind (used only as the site was small at the start but now it gets a lot of attention from me with updates). I want to seperate this all out so it's easy to test (what MVC addresses), and the coupling is generally low. Is it enough to use WCF to achieve this? What other techniques could I employ? Maintainability is another concern because maintaining a codebase split between .dlls is awkward (when debugging, as I noticed and mentioned in some previous threads).
Thanks
Unfortunately, traditional web forms applications are damn near impossible to test. WCF won't be of much help because it's a communications technology that will help you to get the data to codebehind classes but won't help you to render or test pages.
Due to this complexity, there are very few test automation tools, and the few there are are commercial paid-for products. One such tool I have heard of, but have not used personally, is Ivonna. You can also test using browser automation. Two great tools to help with this purpose are watin and WebAii.
This is, of course, dependent on whether you still want to keep the original code lying around. What I take in when I read your post is that you want all of the benefits of MVC. Unfortunately, it may be best to take the plunge and rewrite the application. It's painful, I know, but the sheer amount of hackery to make WebForms ape MVC concepts is overwhelming, to say the least.
I cant fully imagine what you need, but consider URL redirection / slug
I have a very large ASP.NET project that i need to make good with web standards -- the application has two parts:
1.) An administrative piece that allows users to 'build' sites
2.) Front end that makes up the users sites (many web controls, master pages, usercontrols, etc... much of it is just code)
I was wondering what poeples recomendations are for making this project utilize web standards? Should i look more into MVC? I havent done anything with MVC but it seems to support friendly URL's by default.
Has anyone done this with an existing large ASP.NET application/site?
thanks in advance :-)
What do you mean by web standards? Valid html/css? no-tale layout? valid javascript?
I suggest you just test it in different browsers and fix the problems you find.
There are two routes you can take.
1) Rip it up and start again
2) Modify what you have and incrementally change it 'one page at a time'
I know that's a simple and obvious answer but truthfully, having done both, they are both viable.
A modern ASP.NET web applciation CAN be standards compliant, can have nice urls with some url re-writing and can seperate content from design. You just need to think before you act, make sure you use .NET 2.0 or .NET 3.5 controls and inspect the output to ensure you're getting good markup.
Converting an old web app to MVC can;'t really be answered without knowing the app itself. It might be perfectly suited to it and be easy, it might be a world of pain.
As always use the best tool for the job.
We need to build an administration portal website to support our client/server application. Since we're a .Net shop the obvious traditional way would be to do that in ASP.Net. But Silverlight 2 will be coming out of beta a good while before our release date. Should we consider building the whole website in silverlight instead, with a supporting WCF backend?
The main function of the portal will be: users, groups and permissions configuration; user profile settings configuration; file upload and download for files needed to support the application.
I think the main reason for taking this approach would be that we have good experience with WPF and WCF, but little experience in ASP.Net. Either way we would have to learn ASP.Net or Silverlight, and learning Silverlight seems a more natural extension of our current skills.
Are there any big no-nos from the experience of StackOverflowers? What are the big positives?
I would recommend against building a pure Silverlight site.
Silverlight suffers from the same issues as Flash does: Unintuitive Bookmarking, issues with printing, accessibility issues, not working back buttons and so on.
Also, you would require your users to have Silverlight installed or at least to have the ability to install it.
In controlled environements (eg. in large companies or health care) or on mobile devices, this might not be the case.
I would definitely go for a full Silverlight application, specially if you have good experience from WPF. You will be able to reuse your knowledge from WPF, and should be able to pick up Silverlight fairly quickly. I've been working with Silverlight since Beta 1, and the current Beta 2 is of solid quality. I guess it's safe to assume that a RTW version is just around the corner.
Pilf has some valid point, specially around printing. For that I would probably use SQL Reporting Services, or some other reporting framework, on the server side, and then pop up a new window with printable reports. For linking and bookmarking the issues are no different than any other AJAX application. I did a blog post today about how to provide deep linking and back-forward navigation in Silverlight.
Silverlight also has all the hooks needed for great accessibility support, as the UI Automation API from WPF is brought into Silverlight. I don't know if the screen reader vendors have caught up yet. The styling/template support in Silverlight makes it easy to provide high-contrast skins for visual impaired users if that is a concern.
Depends on your goals. If administration portal is part of application and will only be used from computers where your application is installed, there are plenty of advantages of going fully Silverlight - or even WPF.
But if you can see a scenario where it will be used either from random PC or by random person, fully functional HTML/Javascript version is absolutely necessary.
Some reasons are:
Most people don't have silverlight and you'll earn a good load of swearing if they have to download and install it. Some people who have it installed keep it disabled (together with flash and sometimes even images) to avoid distractions and speed up browsing.
When HTML site fails, user gets error page and reloads. When silverlight fails, it can hang or crash.
HTML is what is expected - both by users and web browsers: back and refresh buttons work as they should, hyperlinks and forms work as expected.
Slow internet is still very common, both in remote areas and mobile devices.
I agree with what everyone had said so far and I think this Flow Chart, which is aimed at Flash, also applies to Silverlight.
Source of Image
It sounds like your problem is that you need a rich-client admin application. Why not use click-once?
On the topic of remote andministrators, another poster stated that was an argument in favor of HTML if the admins were on a slow connection. I would argue that depending on the type of information, it may be more efficient to use Silverlight. If you have an ASP.NET datagrid populated with server side data binding, you can be downloading a ton of markup and viewstate data. Even if you're using an alrternative to DataGrid that's lighter on the ViewState, you will still have a lot of HTML to download.
In Silverlight, once you get the XAP down, which is probably going to be smaller than the corresponding HTML, the XAP is cached and so you shouldn't have that cost every time, and you'll just be retrieving the data itself.
For another example, let's say you have a bunch of dropdown lists on one of your forms which all have the same values in the list. In Silverlight, you can get these values once and bind them to all of the dorpdowns, in HTML you will have to repeat them each time.
This will get better with client side data binding in ASP.NET, which follows a very similar model to Silverlight and WPF for data binding.
Overall, I would also think that you would need to write less code for the Silverlight implementation which can increase productivity and reduce maintenace costs.
ASP all the way. You should only use silverlight/flash etc when text can't do what you want it to do - e.g. display video.
Using a plugin for your website makes it slow, and requires the user to have the plugin installed. Silverlight for instance rules out all Linux user. Also, since Silverlight is pretty new, there is no telling how committed Microsoft will be to keep the platform alive if it doesn't pick up soon.
I'd stick to plain old HTML with server side scripting.
Also, for public websites: Flash and Silverlight can't be indexed by any search engine, so good luck with writing tons of metadata if you want any visitors at all.
Silverlight is a good choice for an internal-facing portal, just as it would be for a public-facing portal if you've already evaluated your project and have decided to go forward with a web portal. You are free to integrate Silverlight components within an existing ASP.NET application (i.e. the "islands of richness") approach, but if you have the ability to build a new project from scratch, don't discount a completely Silverlight solution as a valid choice where you would have went with a traditional ASP.NET portal. Silverlight is RTW now, so if this decision is still on the table, you know you won't have to deal with breaking changes going forward.
There are some downsides with developing a site completely in Flash / Silverlight, but if those downsides won't matter to you or won't have an impact then there is nothing stopping you. Choose whatever tool you think meets your needs more fully. I wouldn't be put off creating a site purely in Silverlight based on the downsides, because it brings a lot more positives to the user experience.
The previous comments have dealt with most of the downsides of using Silverlight for a site like this and I agree. If you're determined to have rich-client style development and your audience is small (for admins only) then I'd probably recommend WPF over Silverlight as it currently provides a richer set of tools and controls.
If you stick with ASP.NET have you looked at Dynamic Data - it's ideal for building backend management sites with little effort.
I've seen "Silverlight only" websites at Microsoft and they are pretty impressive. But again, the demos were there to exploit the full potential of what Silverlight can do. The moment you need something different you may be out of luck. I don't see Silverlight like Flash except in the way they are installed/seen. But the Flash/ActionScript backend is really bad compared to what Visual Studio can offer with .NET
Ask yourself why would you like to use Silverlight? Fancy effects or programming model?