I am trying to create a mobile version of a web application using VS2010 (.Net 3.5, not 4). When I search for information on ASP.net mobile I see a lot of references to mobile controls that adapt their HTML to the specific device requesting the page. Since I would like this app to be viewable on as many as devices as possible, it seems like it would be better to use the mobile controls rather than just create a smaller version of a web form. Apparently VS2008 and up do not include the mobile control templates, but you can download and install them separately. I did, but when I tried to create a test page I get a server error complaining that the assembly "System.Web.Mobile" could not be found. I double checked in my references and that assembly is included in the project. The file System.Web.Mobile.dll is also on the server running the app.
Is there something that I am doing wrong, or is developing a mobile web app in this way using VS2010 not possible?
Thanks,
Mike
I didn´t found Mobile Web Forms templates for 2010 (for 2008). But Mobile Controls is a old and unused technology, you should use MVC.
Related
I need to write a simple app which will work in a cloud where I can store data about clients and it will be avaiable from Windows and Android and I assume it has to be a website.
What is the difference between ASP .NET Web Forms Applcation and ASP .NET Web Forms Site? Which one should I use?
Web Form Site is nothing more than previously called Website projects where you work with webpages which is just small php like (with Razor/aspx) script files which render as html.
Webform is more like a component oriented framework. Web Form Site or WebSite should only be used for small projects or if the project needs to be compile in C#/VB both language. Also if you want to put your all source code in web-server then it can be used. On contrary with WebForm application you don't need to put code base files to run the projects - you'd be better off only putting scripting .aspx files.
This has been explained in detail in the following question:
ASP.NET Web Site or ASP.NET Web Application?
Also, you can check out the differences between the two here:
MSDN
Regarding your first question if your app is native or hybrid then you need REST(WebApi in .net world) which any app can access natively regardless of the device and will meet your needs of the "cloud".
If you what you want is a website instead that is "viewable" by mobile devices you may want to make your website "responsive" and you can look at various bootstraps templates that can help you with that.
Regarding your second question I think it has no bearing nor it will make any difference in creating a mobile app which project type you use.
This question is coming from a Front-End developer new to .NET.
I'm working on a web app that was built a while ago using Webforms. I was asked to integrate two new features to this application. The features would be accessible via two new tabs added to the navigation bar.
What I want to happen is, when the user clicks on the new tab, the application loads up the MVC project as a view inside of the Web Forms app. Here's a link to a picture to explain it better:
The way the project was originally setup is we have the original Webforms project, and we created an MVC project which are siblings inside the same parent folder. The backend devs think this will work fine for them. I have no idea how to get the two projects to load up simultaneously. There hasn't been much work done on either side yet so we're open to ideas of how to restructure this.
I should also add that for the new features the Back-end is just serving up JSON, and I will use AngularJS on the Front-End as opposed to Razor.
Other potentially relevant project info:
Using Visual Studio 2012 (I think we have access to 2013 however)
.NET MVC 4
Webforms (2.0 or 3.5 possibly)
What is the use of web.config.CLR4 file in asp.net web application ? To be specific i came across it while examining tools developed by infragistics i.e in netadvantage product which provides tools like grid view, tab, tree view for developing web applications. As well please help me with step wise solution to develop a tool from the scratch in asp.net using c#.
In order to successfully deploy your ASP.NET project to IIS you need web.config appropriate for the target CLR, thus there are different web.config files for CLR2 CLR35 and CLR4.
As of the start of this week I've been required to start learning how to develop websites in ASP. I have a moderate level of experience with C# through XNA, so that part of it isn't much trouble for me.
I've been following a Music Store Tutorial which takes me though setting up an "ASP.NET MVC 3" application.
I'm about done with the tutorial and have a functioning site when I run a test locally, but I don't understand what files need to be uploaded. I've worked on front-end updates for ASP websites before but they were completely different to this in terms of what files made up the site and so on.
I don't see a single .aspx page in my project which is what I assumed an ASP site was made of from experience. I'm starting to think that those projects weren't MVC projects but maybe just the "ASP.NET Web Application" style project.
Are ASP.NET and ASP.NET MVC different? From what I vaguely understand, MVC is just a framework that wraps ASP.NET? Also, is ASP something or is that just a synonym for ASP.NET? Finally back to my initial confusion, what files are to be uploaded onto the server when I want to launch an ASP.NET MVC project?
Do I just upload this entire directory and the server will handle it in the same way that the inbuilt testing ASP server does? Or is the site compiled down into a couple of files somehow and I just upload one of these directories (I think I read that somewhere).
ASP is an acronym for Active Server Pages. Pre .NET, ASP was Microsoft's first iteration scripted web pages. All of those pages typically ended with the extension .ASP.
When .NET was released, ASP was overhauled significantly and renamed ASP.NET. The new version of ASP.NET attempted to model web development similar to windows application development, where you used controls and an event handling model. That was Microsoft's primary model for web page development for many years, and it still around and supported, but today it is referred to as ASP.NET Web Forms. ASP.NET Web Forms pages typically have the .ASPX extension you mentioned.
In the mid-2000s or so, Ruby on Rails took off, using an MVC based model for developing web applications. A few years later, Microsoft released an alternate version of ASP.NET, called ASP.NET MVC, which used similar concepts. Many people feel the MVC approach is a more natural method for developing web pages than the web forms model (note epic Q/A threads on this very site a few years ago). In any case, ASP.NET MVC shares parts with ASP.NET Web Forms, but looks and works pretty differently; for one thing, there are no .ASPX pages as MVC, for the most part, uses a different form of routing to determine what to display.
That's a very brief history that glosses over a whole lot of subjects. What you've posted a screenshot of, is an ASP.NET MVC project.
As far as publishing is concerned, the typical route for publishing an ASP.NET website is to open the project in Visual Studio, select Build|Publish, and tell VS where to put it. Depending on what method you use, you may have to do additional configuration in IIS on the box where you published the site.
First off, when you say ASP, you're referring to old (obsolete) tech. ASP.NET is specifically what you're referring to in your question.
ASP.NET is a Microsoft technology which works cooperatively with the IIS server to provide a "Windows Application" type experience with web sites. Your web site logic is compiled in to a .NET DLL "Class Library." When a web request hits IIS with a URL matching your application directory, IIS starts up your application internally and maintains it.
I don't understand what files need to be uploaded
Visual Studio actually has a built in publisher available for your use. See the Build -> Publish menu in VS / Web Developer.
I don't see a single .aspx page in my project which is what I assumed an ASP site was made of from experience.
ASP.NET Web Forms uses the aspx extension for Pages, their frontend rendering component. On the other hand, ASP.NET MVC uses the concept of Views, which are not relient on a specific component. See the next paragraph.
Are ASP.NET and ASP.NET MVC different?
Yes. No. Maybe. ASP.NET contains all the "magic" which allows IIS - the web server - run the web application and serve up web pages. Volumes could (and have) been written on this. ASP.NET also supports much configuration through the means of Http Modules and Providers. These components are declared and configured through the web apps web.config file and are typically automagically created and persisted by IIS and ASP.NET. They collectively make up the glue that makes ASP.NET just work out of the box.
MVC was built on top of the existing foundation classes of ASP.NET. Some features have been loaned, a few have been replaced and more than a handful have been created in order to support the model-view-controller pattern.
For example, MVC gives us support for View Engines - a runtime library which allows us to write our Views (web pages) in a particular format. The ASPX View Engine existed during MVC's launch. Later came Razor, employing the .cshtml extension. Users of the MVC Framework have implemented a wide variety of their own view engines as well. This is possible due to the modular nature of ASP.NET and MVC.
Do I just upload this entire directory and the server will handle it in the same way that the inbuilt testing ASP server does? Or is the site compiled down into a couple of files somehow and I just upload one of these directories (I think I read that somewhere).
I would recommend using the Build -> Publish menu in Visual Studio. You may use web deploy if your host supports it, but FTP and File System methods are available as well.
The bin folder contains the class libraries required to run your web application on the server. The web.config file provides the configuration to do so. However your Views are not compiled in to the assembly. They are published as-is and are rendered lazily by the view engine.
You are probably familiar with ASP.NET WebForms, this is an MVC project. You can find more here:
ASP.NET MVC
In order to upload the site, you need to publish the website from inside Visual Studio to a local file location and then upload everything to the website.
If the target server doesn't have MVC installed, you can right click on the website project in Visual Studio and select "Add Deployable Dependencies".
This will ensure that the server has all the required files to run an MVC project.
In Visual Studio, I tried a project in both. But there appears to be no difference in the tools displayed in the tool box....
So what the real basic major difference.?
See these:
ASP.NET Web Site or ASP.NET Web Application?
Website is for internet based audience - in this case your concerns(security, etc) are different;
Web application is a software, just like a desktop application software, usually intended to be used for intranet environments. For instance, an HR software could be a web app - that is available on the intranet for all the departments to fill in their timesheets.
Though, a website may contain specific operations, tasks, or workflows.
Checkout: Web site project vs Web app project
WebSite project is compiled on the fly.
In a WebApplication, you need to build a page before you can debug.
However, WebApplication is the way to go, because with WebSite-project, you cannot create a setup project (and conversion from WebSite to WebApplication can lead to problems/bugs).
That's why I recommend WebApplication.
Simply put, a WebSite is worth nothing if the customer is too stupid to install it manually.