Okay today, as most of you noticed Framework 4.0 has been released. I've been working on a project which is being built on framework 3.5. Since I want to use dynamic keyword and most of the asp.net features like Tableless Menu Control, ClientIDMode and clean web.config etc. I am kinda urging to migrate the unfinished project to 4.0 but I am little hesitating about that.Some times I think it is way better to wait for SP1.
So what do you think about it? You guys will migrate to unfinished projects or will still hang out with 3.5 for a while.
Thanks.
The .Net 4.0 runtime environment has been out for a while (mind you not RTM, but RC1 and so forth). A lot of people have tested it and I would guess that almost all of the bugs have been shaken out. There should be no problem switching at this point. They have introduced a number of items that improve .Net. Are they necessary, no, but they can make programming in .Net easier.
You can always download 4.0 locally and test it out on your project. Worse comes to worse, the project blows up and you reload it from your source control system.
What you should be aware of is that there are breaking changes in both C# and VB.Net in 4.0 runtime environment. You'll need to watch out for those.
The following probably applies to most framework-base development.
Do the new features save more time than fixing the old things the upgrade breaks?
If you're going to waste lots of time making old things work, perhaps you're better off just to sit it out on 3.x and port to 4.x at a later phase.
If you really need features from 4.0 and would have to spend time implementing them yourself, perhaps it's a net time saving.
Can you support this version of the framework? (ie can your server people handle the upgrades and monitor things okay?)
If your server bods can't make this work in the field, give up now. I don't know your organisational structure or who runs your servers but I know some companies have a pretty thorough testing regime they'll put software through before allowing it. As a brand new version, they might be weary.
And let's be frank, just because something goes through several pre-release versions, they don't catch every bug because they're rarely used in production scenarios. You know the drill.
And if installing 4.0 on the server breaks old things, you might be waiting a long time.
Is your project's launch likely going to be after the first round of bug fixes?
If you're developing this for 3+ months away, you've probably got enough time to sort the platform issues, fix the code issues and get framework bugs reported with the (blind) hope that they fix them or you can work around them safely.
If you're launching tomorrow, it's not enough time to test it.
I will only upgrade when there is a need to do it. For example I have one application that must use features delivered in .Net Framework 4. So that application will get upgraded ASAP.
I have another application that is 3.5 with no driving need to upgrade at this time. That one will get upgraded when time and budget allows.
Related
Hai Friends
I having the project in Vb i want to migrate that project in the vb.net.any tool available pls inform me.i have tried a lot.i have not installed the visual basic.with the help of remote server i am running that project.
Quite a few versions of Visual studio have a built-in Upgrade Wizard to help you with converting VB6 to Vb.Net code. I know that VS 2005 Pro has it but I'm not sure what other versions.
Here's an article about how to go about upgrading. And there's even a complete free e-book about it as can be found here.
Aside from the sources Ho1 mentions some of the biggest pitfalls are the lack of control arrays, printing and graphics. The printing can be partly mitigated by the use of Printer Compatibility. You can download the PCL as part of the Visual Basic Power Pack 3.0.
If you have room in your budget I would recommend ArtinSoft. www.artinsoft.com. They have a trial version that you can test out. They have been named Microsoft's preferred VB to .NET upgrade solution provider.
I have trialed artinsoft's upgrade companion.
I have also looked at vbmigration partner.
This is my, very limited, anecdotal experience.
On vbmigration partner they have some sample conversions of projects they found on planat sourcecode.
One is call ezdatabase.
If you run vbmigration partner's conversion it will crash if you click the connect/disconnect button more than twice.
On the vb6 version you can click this all day without crashing.
This project is small enough to put through the artinsoft trial of vbuc in its entirety, so i did that.
However after i converted it, there seemed to be a lot of compile errors.
It's not a fair comparison as obviously vb migration partner had lots of opportunity to perfect it before putting the converted code on their website. and yet it was easy to crash.
However I was also disappointed with artinsoft's tool as this was just a small (few hundred lines) crud application and yet there were a lot of compile errors.
Make of this what you will. I would like to hear of others' experiences.
EDIT : On the other hand if this is a true test of the relative capabilities of vb migration partner and artinsoft vbuc then vb migration arner is clearly the winner in this example
Can anyone tell me main steps to consider while migrating 1.1 to 3.5 windows based application?
What are the steps need to consider at initially while planing for migration?
as per i know this applicatin i need to migrate like wsf and wpf and soo on.
You'll need to upgrade the projects to .NET 3.5 Framework and then build the solution. Fix any compilation errors (there will likely be a few), and then you will need a large QA effort to make sure you didn't break anything. It's really more of just a time sink than anything you need a specific plan for.
If you can manage it, see if you can write unit tests for your app, and then after the upgrade, make sure all those unit tests pass.
http://www.codeproject.com/KB/books/net2_cs2_newfeatures.aspx
http://www.simple-talk.com/dotnet/.net-framework/.net-3.5-language-enhancements/
I guess you should look through new features and check whether a change in code is necessary for that new feature.
With the amount of effort involved and the changing to newer technologies like WPF, I think you are better off doing a re-write of the application in 3.5. We have had some ugly upgrades done at my place of work that may compile and run as 3.5 but are really just hacked 1.1 applications.
I am preparing to start on a new short-term contract (1-2 months) that involves replacing an Access application by moving it to ASP.NET and SQL Server.
I am only responsible for the ASP part and connecting it to the database.
The only requirement is that whatever technologies I use be relatively well-known in the area, so that if they need to have someone else work on it, it isn't specialized knowledge.
So, I could do this in Rails or ASP.NET, but, when should the development be aiming for .NET 4 Framework, as there are many changes coming out that may be advantageous to use.
Or, even though it may be useful, when is it better to just ignore new features and stay on an older version of .NET?
I am assuming that hardware isn't the limitation, as many computers won't be able to run .NET 4 Framework, but that would be an issue for a hosting company, as they can find a hosting company to support whichever framework the application is designed for. If Rails makes the most sense, as their hope is to have the application written quickly, but have it reliable, then again, the hosting company would need to support it, or they use a different one.
This company hasn't used a hosting company, they need to find one, so there isn't a relationship that could be an issue.
UPDATE: Part of my concern is that initially the application will not require javascript, but phase 2 will be to make it more interactive, as some clients won't be allowed to have javascript on their computers. In order to limit how much javascript must be known by a developer there are frameworks that will adapt to browsers and situations fairly well, which is why I am also thinking about RoR and the fact that there appears to be changes coming out in .NET 4 that may help with this.
As a general rule of thumb, I wait one year before building sites in a new framework unless the client specifically asks for the newest technology. This has worked out very well for me. The advantages are:
The technology is much more stable (hotfixes, service packs, etc.)
Common complaints about missing functionality are usually resolved
Hosting companies, support communities and corporate IT departments have had time to get used to the technology, find out more about it, play around with it and have it mature within their organization
Unless there is specific need for new functionality introduced by .Net 4, there is no point in subjecting your clients to the immediate problems with an initial release, or making it more difficult for them to find hosting. You should either investigate all of this up-front, or use .Net 3.5 in the meantime.
The only requirement is that whatever
technologies I use that it be
relatively well-known in the area, so
that if they need to have someone else
work on it, it isn't specialized
knowledge.
I would have thought that requirement was enough not to develop this project on .NET 4.0 - it takes time for a new framework version to filter down into the market, and it will be a while yet before there are a lot of developers around with .NET 4.0 experience.
Also, you would be essentially developing on top of a BETA product - while I'm sure most of the features will remain unbroken from BETA -> RTM, there is always a risk that something will break or not work like it did in BETA, so why risk this on a commercial project?
I wouldn't target .NET 4.0 yet on a commercial project unless there was a specific reason for doing so, and even then you would have to have buy-in from the client, ie "I can do this much more quickly and with less effort if we use the current beta version X rather than established, stable version Y" - good luck with that.
I worked on a commercial project that used the CTP version of LINQ to SQL - then when we went to VS2008 / 3.5, suddenly everything changed and we had to make a lot of changes just to get LINQ to SQL working again.
Stick with 3.5 - it's easier for hosting and getting developers.
Just a couple of thoughts, I wouldn't even think about creating an application for production use in .NET 4/ASP.NET 4 until:
There is a release candidate. It's
not the first time I've seen
features in beta's not make it to
RC/RTM.
Microsoft have permitted development and deployment
of production applications by way of a 'Go
Live' license.
There are some hosters out in the market such as OrcsWeb who are participating in public beta testing, but they aren't intended for production use.
I'd run with the .NET 3.5/ASP.NET 2.0 or MVC bits for now. Better safe than sorry.
Generally speaking it's going to be easier finding hosting for a Rails app. If you want to run .net 4.0 you're probably going to have to run a VPS or dedicated machine. However if you're bailing after the application is finished and assuming your client is in Knoxville, they're going to have a tougher time finding a Rails developer to maintain the application.
I think the bigger question is your role. They're looking to you to solve this problem for them. Are you productive in both technologies? How about getting a Windows server up and running? A Linux server? How's your SQL Server vs MySql? I'd guess that you're probably stronger on one stack vs the other - for a contract that short I wouldn't want to be doing a lot of experimental development.
i wait until the OS that everyone will be using has it.
Just last month i took a dependancy on GDI+, which first shipped with Windows XP.
This question is similar to my earlier question.
I have used ASP .Net in Visual Studio 2005 about 4 years ago. How long would it take to get back up to speed with the latest versions?
That depends on how much you "used" it. An experienced developer should have no trouble updating his knowledge of the 3.0 to 3.5 Framework changes and language specific changes. The largest introduction, I'd say since then has been LINQ, giving the ability to query data from the language level rather than SQL.
But if you're not an experience developer and don't have a good foundation in the previous version, most of what you'll be learning will be the Framework 3.0 and VS2005.
So, ultimately, if you're just going from VS2005 to 2008, it shouldn't be much trouble at all.
Not very long. The major addition to VS 2008 is support for Linq, but you don't have to use this (or any of the new features).
The IDE is extremely similar to VS 2005.
Essentially, 2005 targets the 3.0 framework, and 2008 target the 3.5 framework, but these are both just expansions of the 2.0 framework, and not new versions (unlike the change from 1.1 to 2.0).
If you were already proficient in it earlier, then you'll be able to jump into it very quickly again. The core concepts haven't changed much, so you should feel right at home.
If you were able to produce and application back then, you can probably still build exactly the same application now.
As has already been stated, .NET v3.5 is merely v2.0 with extra bells and whistles, like LINQ and AJAX. These are tools in a broader toolkit, and there is no requirement that you must use any/all of them.
So start where you left off. Refresh yourself, and once you are back in the swing of things, have a look through some of the latest enhancements, and pick out one or two that you think will be useful to you. One step at a time!
Everyone else is correct that it should be easy. I'd just add that the ListView control is one of the additions, so be sure to check that one out.
It depends on what you want to use ASP.NET for.
If you live in the HTTP Request/Response world, it will take time. Most of that time will be spent trying to shift documentations which completely ignore the Requrest/Respone world in favor of ViewState and other similar items.
If you want to go ViewState way, not too long, since Microsoft's website is overflowing with tutorials on it.
Take a look at some of the starter kits like Kigg, DinnerNow, and DropThings . You'll get an idea of MVC, WCF and LINQ. Ignore that sinking feeling and get to work learning!
Has anyone built a website with IronPython and ASP.NET. What were your experiences and is the combination ready for prime-time?
The current version of ASP.NET integration for IronPython is not very up-to-date and is more of a "proof-of-concept." I don't think I'd build a production website based on it.
Edit:: I have a very high level of expectation for how things like this should work, and might setting the bar a little high. Maybe you should take what's in "ASP.NET Futures", write a test application for it and see how it works for you. If you're successful, I'd like to hear about it. Otherwise, I think there should be a newer CTP of this in the next six months.
(I'm a developer on IronPython and IronRuby.)
Edit 2: Since I originally posted this, a newer version has been released.
Check out the Dynamic Languages in ASP.NET page on Codeplex. This has the newest IronPython bits. It doesn't give you any Visual Studio integration, other than the sample website project, but that's coming.
Keep a look out for ASP.NET MVC
The IronRuby guys have got some internal builds of MVC to work with IronRuby, and IronPython 2 and IronRuby have a lot of code in common with the DLR.
I'm not sure if they'll support IronPython/IronRuby when MVC is released, but it's definitely worth keeping your eye on anyway - The old ASP.NET forms-based development model is old, busted, and the sooner it goes away the better.