This may sound a bit general, but I have a startup that is working on an ASP.NET (greenfield) suite of software applications. We are aiming to spend a substantial amount of time in the architecture phase to develop a strong foundation for our software. I was wondering if anyone has any advice, anything we should focus on or any suggestions for areas we should focus on to build a better suite.
Some things we are focusing on right now:
1. Session state requirements - should sessions be sticky or should we take server clustering session migration into account.
2. User login authentication - what are the major concerns in this space - LDAP, AD, custom SQL authentication systems etc.
3. The DAL - ORM vs Stored Proc
4. Integrating multiple ASP.NET applications in a single software suite. How it should look/feel. How it should be architected, etc.
I would appreciate any advice from any architects out there that have built similar systems from the ground up.
I know there are lots of solutions to session, but if you can create your framework to be session-free, you will avoid a lot of potential headaches. (There are lots of session-free options, but an obvious one is a hidden form field, somewhat like ViewState.)
Just some quick notes. I can't get too detailed since we went through this exercise where I worked last year - and I don't work there any more!
Start from the beginning using Enterprise Library, especially the Logging and Exception Handling application blocks. I've also found their Unity dependency injection library to be very useful.
Consider using Visual Studio Team Foundation Server. It's not just for source control, but can create you a complete continuous integration solution, complete with integrated bug tracking, code quality tracking, etc. If you've got the time and people, it's well worth a man-month to learn how to do an initial deployment.
You may want to buy one or more licenses of one of the Visual Studio Team System editions. You don't need these versions in order to use TFS, but they work well with it.
Consider globalization right from the start. Same with customization, if your suite will run on customer premises and be customizable by them.
You haven't said how large your team is, or is expected to be. If it's large enough, you'll want to spend at least a man-week learning a bit about what's available to you in terms of Visual Studio Extensibility. Your developers (and maybe also your QA folks) will all but live in Visual Studio, so the ability to customize it to meet your needs can be a big win. Whether it's just some macros and maybe some customized project or item templates, or whether you want to do add-ins or more, Visual Studio is very extensible.
Be certain to use WCF for any web services work. The older ASMX web service technology is now considered by Microsoft to be "legacy software".
Finally, be sure to find out whether you qualify for BizSpark, "A program that provides Software, Support and Visibility for Software Startups." And does so almost for free.
I saw a demo of Silverlight 3 at the PhillyDotNet User Group last night - WOW. Wow for business applications, not graphic applications. There is a learning curve, but you get a lot for it. For example, the demo showed a grid being bound to a table without needing to write any code.
Right out of the box you had sorting, editing, paging, etc. But it wasn't the lame stuff you normally get and then have to rework. For example the paging was smart enough to write the sql that would only bring back the 20 rows you needed for the page.
The demo continued with him putting a detail form on the page for editing. Again no code, but it was smart enough to know that it had the same datasource as the grid on the page. So as you were moving row to row on the grid - the detail form was showing the current row (and it was very fast).
Both the grid and the detail form were editable and as you changed a field in one the other would reflect the new value. The editing was smart enough to validate the field on its own. So you couldn't put a letter in a field that was an integer type, etc. It also limited the number of characters that could be entered based on the column size found in the database. All the date fields on the detail form automatically had a calendar next to them. You get the idea - no coding for any of this.
If this weren't enough, it can be used to build occasionally connected applications. So he showed how he updated a few records on a few different pages, had the option to revert back a field later (ctrl-Z), and then at the end submitted all the changed records to be saved.
Also, they said it works with Linq2SQL and the entity fraimwork.
So if I were building a new product now, I would really look into this as a way of differentiating my product. And I suspect that if you don't do it with Silverlight now, you will be rewriting it in a few years anyway.
Here is a link to a demo (not the one I saw.)
Some general thoughts. If you'd like me to expound on any of these, let me know.
Inheriting from a custom subclass of
Page instead of Page itself is a
great way to share functionality
across your site.
Nested MasterPages are good.
Charting: I've tried DevExpress,
Syncfusion, and MSChart control and
all have their own issues.
The built-in forms authentication is
pretty good. Building a site that
allows both integrated authentication
and forms authentication is tricky
but can be done.
I've tried using cross page postbacks
and I'm still not sure if I like
them.
Localization takes a lot of time
Come up with a good structure for your App_Themes and css.
Use Elmah to track unhandled exceptions
Related
I am not sure if this is a valid question here but couldn't find an answer elsewhere. I am just about to starting training on Microsoft Dynamics CRM and with just over an year of experience with asp.net, a little bit of JavaScript, HTML and CSS, I am not sure if I am headed the right way.
Is this sufficient? What skills should I try to sharpen up before starting with Dynamics?
Dynamics CRM is probably the most flexible system I have ever worked on. You can extend it and make it do just about anything. So the first thing you will want to learn about is the different vectors or customization. You can customize CRM in several different ways and each has it merits and drawbacks:
Javascript [Client side only]. Note that CRM doesn't support customization by directly accessing the DOM, rather you work through XRM exposed interfaces. It allows practical GUI and data manipulation though through REST and FetchXML queries.
Workflows. These are rules you can program via the "point and click" interface. It allows you to monitor when certain actions happen and then react accordingly. These run server side so it is independent of the client. The system ships with lots of rules, but custom rules can be written to extend these almost infinitely.
Plugins. Similar to workflows but these fire immediately after subscribed to events. You can do things here like perform validation (which you can also do in Javascript, but plugins are server side) and manipulate data on or after saves.
For custom workflows and plugins, you will definitely need to be familiar with .NET (at least 4.0). You can use either C# or VB.NET, but the Visual Studio integration (which is really nice) is limited to C#. You can use VB.NET but it requires a lot of manual configuration so I wouldn't recommend it given the choice between the two. At the time of this writing, however, the Visual Studio integration is limited to VS 2010 and VS 2012 Professional.
This is just a primer, there is lots more info on MSDN and there are tons of blogs available to help you get started. Of course you can always post your specific questions here on SO for help...
Good luck to you.
We need to develop quite a powerful web application for an investment bank. The bank IT would like us to build it on top of the SharePoint platform, but we would prefer to do pure ASP.NET programming.
The web-app should have the following characteristics.
1) It will be a site for bank's clients that will allow them to view their stock portfolios, get miscellaneous reports with graphs and charts, etc.
2) The web-app will also allow clients to send orders to the bank to buy stocks and perform other financial operations.
3) The number of users will be approximately 3 000 000 (total) and 20 000 at any one time.
We have never made any SharePoint programming, but as far as I know, SharePoint is primarily designed to create intranet sites for colleagues to communicate with each other and work more efficiently, to maintain a document library, etc.
However, the bank IT told us that SharePoint has in fact lots of other features that will help us make the project more efficiently - for example, it seems that SharePoint has some built-in scalability and high availability technologies.
I heard saying that SharePoint development is very tedious, that the platform cannot be very easily customized, etc.
The question is: is it better to create our web-app on pure ASP.NET and deal with scalability and other issues ourselves, or base it on SharePoint - taking into account that the web-app we need to create is non-standard and complex?
Thank you,
Mikhail.
UPDATE
In the answers, someone suggested using ASP.NET MVC. My another question is: should we use "classic" ASP.NET or ASP.NET MVC for such project (if we leave out the SharePoint option)?
Do you need document management? Do you need version management? Do you need to create "sites"? Do you need audience filtering? Do you need ECM (fancy word for CMS), Do you need collaboration stuff on your site? If your answer is no then SharePoint is not for you.
You said "We have never made any SharePoint programming" and for that reason alone I think you should not use SharePoint. You also say that your app is going to be "non-standard" and complex, another reason not to use SharePoint.
Sounds like you know ASP.NET so I would advice to stick with ASP.NET or ASP.NET MVC.
Hope this helps
The answer is simple, you should go with what you know. If you prefer to do it in ASP.NET then, that is what you should go with. Trying to learn a new technology on that size of a project will almost certainty cause you severe problems when trying to develop it. Can sharepoint scale to that number of users, probably, but you don't know how to make it do that. That is the real key.
They are correct SharePoint does have a lot of functionality out of the box, but that doesn't mean that it will make you more efficient, because you don't know all of the APIs etc. to access.
Actually, if you want to know the way to cheat. If they force you into using it, you can run ASP.NET applications under SharePoint (well kind of). You can tell SharePoint to essentially ignore a path in the site and use regular ASP.NET as a web application just like any other site does. Really, this isn't using SharePoint, but it can get you out of a bind, in the "Needs to use SharePoint to make them happy scenario".
Mayo suggested contacting MS. I have a feeling they already have a relationship with the bank and have provided some insight about the project. I would contact: http://www.mindsharp.com/ and see if they can help you out. They are a training company, but I bet that the owners would be willing to help consult, and I haven't found anyone with more knowledge on SharePoint than Todd Bleeker.
I'll not go into the merits of sharepoint, but suffice it to say that I have been developing in sharepoint since it was known as "digital dashboard" - it was just a javascript-encrusted today page for outlook. With respect to its .NET incarnations, it has taken me about 3 years to become what some might call "expert" on SharePoint 2007/MOSS.
First up, let me give you some warnings concerning the politics of these kind of jobs. As a contractor, ALL of my jobs over the last 6 years - covering shaerpoint 2003 and 2007 - WITHOUT fail, have been getting about me on site with a client who has demanded sharepoint, and a development shop with decent ASP.NET developers who have become hopelessly lost and more than likely have blown 95% of the budget on the last 5% of the project because they have embarked on writing custom extensions to the platform without fully understanding the product.
If clients, and the shops who service them, spent more time understand the product and studied it to see how they could change/streamline their business processes & requirements slightly to suit sharepoint instead of being rigid in their specs (that were ALWAYS written with next to zero real experience of the platform) and deciding to get custom development done, then more sharepoint projects would be delivered on time and on budget. Sadly, this is not the case.
So, number one: SharePoint 2007 is an excellent product, but please, for the love of jeebus, find yourselves some top gun sharepoint developers who really understands the product before you embark on this journey. If you don't, you will all go down in flames.
-Oisin
What a load of CRAP that sharepoint isn't cut out for what the op wants to use it for. Especially the "Do not get yourself wrapped up in SharePoint" comment from ChaosPandion. Maybe he thought it to difficult and gave up...
Sure SharePoint development takes some getting used to, but it is able to what is wanted by the op most definately. SharePoint is built using ASP.NET so anything you do in ASP.NET can be used / ported to SharePoint. It is not a standalone product, but a DEVELOPMENT PLATFORM. It will scale to serve that many users, using multiple WFE's (Web Front Ends) and a SQL Cluster as backend.
The question here is: is sharepoint the most suited platform for building this site? Then I would have to answer, probably not, seeing as the wanted functionality is almost all custom development. If you plan on doing web content management as well, then yes, SharePoint is definately worth looking into. Also, SharePoint takes away all (or at least most :-D) authorisation and authentication wories. It is Department of Defense certified. And if the offered out of the box security is not enough, just write an authentication provider (seeing as SharePoint uses ASP.NET's provider model).
To answer your questions:
The bank IT told us that SharePoint has in fact lots of other features that will help us make the project more efficiently - for example, it seems that SharePoint has some built-in scalability and high availability technologies.
SharePoint is farm based, to which you can add machines, having each machine perform a different task, which means either app server, index server, WFE, document conversion services., WFE's can be behind a load balancer to distribute requests. Also I want to mention the web content management again.
I heard saying that SharePoint development is very tedious, that the platform cannot be very easily customized, etc.
Like I said, SharePoint is based on ASP.NET, so it is as much customizable as ASP.NET is. You could even create an ASP.NET web site, put all UI in Controls and then use those is SharePoint, maybe even have the controls use it's own database. As for it being tedious, not really. It's just DIFFERENT and deployment / testing is not like normal deployment / testing. SharePoint uses so called solution files (.wsp files), to package up functionality and deploy it to the server. This IMHO makes it possible to deploy functionality in a very modular way. Furthermore, there are loads of cool open source projects out there that make sharepoint development much easier and also provide cool extensions to "pimp" your site and make it more fun and easy to use for end-users.
Nuff said....
SharePoint development can be tedious but I'd hardly say the platform cannot be easily customized. I recently began developing with it full time and so far, I impressed at it's flexibility and suitability for my application but my needs are quite different from what you've described.
I understand 2007 is a vast improvement over 2003 so perhaps your information is only outdated. I hear 2010 is going to again be a significant improvement.
It's your job to deliver the functionality that the customer desires. If they desire a SharePoint solution, unless there's some particular reason why SharePoint really is a weaker model, that's what you should be able to deliver. In the event that SharePoint isn't a good fit, you need to be able to explain why to the bank's satisfaction. I'm not convinced "We don't know SharePoint" is an acceptable response in this situation: the bank's inclination should, at that point, be to find someone who knows both technologies well enough to deliver a product in SharePoint or better explain why SharePoint isn't actually what they want.
UPDATE: After looking at this more I would add that I do not believe that SharePoint is for you. As I mention below SharePoint is for collaboration. If the users that come to the site require an isolated experience then SharePoint is more overhead than you need.
SharePoint is built on top of ASP.NET so you have everything that you want to do with ASP.NET in addition to what SharePoint provides. Anyone who says that it is difficult is trying to make it that way. You can deploy stand alone custom pages with 100% of your own code and it will run under sharepoint, or you can create new application pages that also contain any code you want to write, or you can simply add your own webparts that can be added to any page you choose with 100% of your own code.
Here is just one example.
Creating an Application Page in Windows SharePoint Services 3.0
What SharePoint offers on top of that is a whole different paradigm on collaboration tools. If you wish to leverage it (if not the cost on return is somewhat limited) you can build amazingly complex and integrated solutions that is build around the aggregation of data from across an enterprise.
That being said, do not go into it lightly. If deployed wrong or with a half understanding of where SharePoint excels and where it does not will result in a diaster. Unless you have the time to understand the core concepts of SharePoint I would warn against it but your client is right. If you do build it in SharePoint you get a great deal more flexibility. One right off the bat is the ability to mix authentication modes. I designed a solution that mixed custom forms authentication with an LDAP backend with Windows Authentication. Anyone could visit the same pages but your authenticated account could come from two different locations.
This is a matter of what kind of concerns you want to have in the application:
Building it to look and function your way, go with sharepoint.
Building it to have infrastructure for authentication, permissions, http/web security, scalability, backup, database maintenance PLUS getting it to look and function your way (but now way more under your control), go with a more pure .NET approach.
I would pick the one I am best at, as Kevin said above.
Edit
More about Kevins post: you can also have your application under sharepoint but with full access to the API, in my projects we do it as a normal ASP.NET application, with own masterpages and everything, but we still use the authentication, lists and doc libraries for uploads, roleassignments for permissions etc. Its a very viable hybrid.
You said,
I heard saying that SharePoint
development is very tedious, that the
platform cannot be very easily
customized, etc.
You have been misinformed about SharePoint. All SharePoint pages are ASP.NET pages. You can customize any of them, either directly, or by using Microsoft Office SharePoint Designer, which is free.
Get started at http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/sharepoint/default.aspx.
SharePoint is a lot of work and with that amount of users I personally (and being a SharePoint developer) wouldn't bother.
I would go down the ASP.MVC route in all honesty and not because it's new and the latest buzz technology. I would use it because it's hands down faster. This site for example is written in ASP.NET MVC and it handles all these requests per day on I think 3 servers. 2 front end and 1 database. Correct my if I'm wrong with that.
The problem with asking whether Sharepoint is easy to customize is that there's a wide range of levels of customization people are experienced with. And for some reason, most people also seem to think that whatever level they customized Sharepoint to is the extent to which anyone else would also try to customize Sharepoint.
It's hard to talk about degrees of customization in concrete terms. What is "customization" to me is wrangling with the core DAL, fighting with bugs in the CAML to SQL query optimizers, overriding the SPListItem hydration pipeline, etc. To others, "customization" might mean building some web part widgets and deploying them in a WSP. If you find that there is some impedance mismatch between your logical model and Sharepoint's working model, you will have a really hard time reconciling the two.
Welcome to the dark land of politics.
It's worth making sure that your team properly evaluate and understand any compromises that SharePoint will have you make. Asking here is a good start. Things I'd look at include:
What's the whole solution going to include? Often the administration of a site can involve as much or more development work as the front end. While the 3M+ user front end is the glamorous part it may not be the bulk of the work.
Are there reference sites for 20K+ simultaneous user SharePoint sites? Honestly? What kind of hardware did that require? Is that available?
Get a small group of experienced contractors in for a few weeks to properly estimate the work, both on ASP.NET MVC and SharePoint. Make sure they've worked on large sites. (There's plenty of contractors around at the moment!)
Also, anticipate failure. Have a fall-back option:
If the MVC technologists win out, expect heat from senior management, and possibly even a skunk-works we'll-do-it-properly-anyway project that duplicates your efforts.
If you do end up with SharePoint, listen very carefully to users throughout the development process and be prepared to create Web parts, MVC pages or whathaveyou to address problem points.
I've been in a similar situation where it turned out that there was heavy vendor influence at a very senior level. The senior team had bought into SharePoint and required it to be used for all internal systems; the OCTO (Office of the Chief Technologist) had mandated open-source technologies. It was fun to watch the fur fly in the middle.
(Our option in the end was to use a service-based architecture based on REST, which effectively booted the current version of SharePoint out of the system altogether.)
I would build this on SharePoint. It is quite suitable for big sites and many sites have already been built on it: topsharepoint.com
SharePoint (like all complex applications) does require sufficient knowledge that you do not seem to have at the moment which is a big risk in my mind. Don't listen to the nay-sayers though.. lack of knowledge is a common problem for devs dealing with SharePoint but it doesn't mean you can't make it do whatever you want.
Regardless, what other options do you have? I think the days of building completely custom CMS's have passed just as building completely custom Intranets are not cost effective anymore. There are many competitors to what they want to do with SharePoint (Umbraco, Sitecore, Sitefinity, etc) and most of them seem better than 100% custom.
So the answer might be neither ASP.NET or Sharepoint..
I was involved in a SharePoint(WSS) project that was very data centric. The project consisted of more than 500 lists that has very complex relations between them. The client also asked for more than 350 Reports. Don't tell me why did you use SharePoint from the beginning. It was a managerial decision and we already delivered the project after 14 months of pain (this is 6 months overdue to the deadline)
When we first started the project, we didn't know anything about SharePoint development (believe it or not). The management said that they will take the risk. They were very convinced that SharePoint is the optimal solution for anything!!!(well, that proved wrong at the end of the project).
Anyway, we were learning SharePoint while we were developing. Our development were mainly based on SharePoint designer to customize all the AllItems/NewForm/EditForm/DispForm for every list to provide the needed logic/validation that the client asked for (Using JavaScript). We also implemented around 15 Custom Fields (e.g. master-details fields). We also made an event receiver to handle all the adding/updating/deleting... events for all the lists in the site. Plus around 40 ASP.Net user controls.
The main problems that faced us (we worked-around it but sadly in an inefficient way)
1- The Client asked for a search web part in each AllItems.aspx. The search web part should have multiple keys for the client to search with. We did that using Form Web parts using SPD no problem. But the real problem was how to search for a related field that was not in the current list. (So, in such cases we had to save these fields values in our list to be able to search for (crap, I know!!)). You might ask, why didn't you implement ASP.Net user controls for such task? Well, that would require us to forsake the default AllItems web part, and were already customized hundereds of AllItems.aspx pages with alot of customization that would take us a lot of time to reimplement them from the beginnging. Also, even if we used user controls, CAML is very inefficient in retrieving data from multiple related lists!
2- I think you can guess this one, if we've already faced a big time doing search web parts, how on earth will be able to do the 350 reports!!:D But we figured out a work-around (as usual :S) we made an Access DB file with links to all the 500 sharePoint lists, then we implemented a user control that has a report viewer control. This user controls takes an ordinary T-SQL Query to query on the Access DB, the Access DB retrieves the data from the SharePoint DB and pass it back to the user control which views the DataSet on the report viewer.
There are other administration related problems, but I would like to focus on the development here.
So, after I showed you the picture (sorry for the long post). What do you think was the best SharePoint development technique that we should have taken in such a data centric Project, if any?
I heard that some companies doesn't use lists at all in such projects, and builds there own SQL database tables instead of the SharePoint Database. But I can't keep my self from wondering, If I'm making my own DB, and hence implementing my CRUD web parts from scratch (We will also lose the security module benefits provided by SP Lists), what would be the benefits of SharePoint?
Once again I apologize for the long post.
I think you found out exactly what I did. Sharepoint just isn't good at handling large enterprise type applications. We ended up creating a custom database to house our data. We used Webparts for the user interface, but otherwise, the entire application was independent of Sharepoint.
In my opinion, Microsoft is overselling Sharepoint. It's actually good at team collaboration sites and simple Excel services applications, but anything beyond that it just isn't capable of handling.
I have to disagree with both Geoff and Abu in regards to SharePoint being a bad choice for large enterprise applications.
As you state yourself Abu your team were learning on the job as you had no SharePoint development experience, the issues you faced was more a Management error that a platform problem, management should have brought in SharePoint contractors to work alongside your team to help build what sounds to be a fairly complex system.
As a developer who has worked with SharePoint for a number of years many of the projects I have worked on some that I myself would not have believed suitable for SharePoint with in my first few years of developing on this platform, however now with more experience I know how to leverage the power of the platform far better and I realise the advantages gained using SharePoint for projects of that nature. That said I have a number of issues with parts of the platform but this is no different to any other platform I have worked on including parts of the ASP.Net platform.
If I was asked to develop a solution using a bespoke Java based system (or perhaps the new MVC platform) I am sure I would experience many problems similar to what you experienced where I simply don’t know what the right approach would be. That would not in any way be an issue with the platform but more with my inexperience.
I am sorry to hear that both of you experienced pains working within the bounds of the SharePoint platform that was forced on you by your management. Though I am disappointed that you are so fast to point the blame away from yourselves and your management.
Was SharePoint the best platform for your projects I can’t say, but that doesn’t make it a bad platform for enterprise applications.
I disagree with Geoff that SharePoint is no good for large enterprise type apps. You have to remember from the start that SharePoint is a development PLATFORM. This means it gives tyou a lot of functionality out of the box, but is extremely customisable.
Being a platform does not mean every bit of customisation needs to be done based on SharePoint lists. Seeing as it is built on ASP.NET you can do anything in SharePoint you could do in ASP.NET as well.
I have built a great deal of ASP.NET apps that were hosted in SharePoint, letting SharePoint do the authentication etc.
I have to say though, determining where SharePoint should stop being your base and you should switch to regular ASP.NET is sometimes hard..
If you are looking for a data-centric solution in SharePoint, the best solution is to use the Business Data Catalog (BDC). This keeps your rich data relationships and all of the SQL (or other DBMS) goodness you want where it should be - in a repository designed to be optimal at storing data.
For an overview of what the BDC functionality can do, see this post on the SharePoint Team Blog. For much more details, read the series on SharePoint Magazine. Note that these features requires an Enterprise license of SharePoint 2007.
Background:
I am an intermediate web app developer working on the .Net Platform. Most of my work has been defined pretty well for me by my peers or superiors and I have no problem following instructions and getting the job done.
The task at hand:
I was recently asked by an old friend to redo his web app from scratch. His app is extremely antiquated and he is getting overwhelmed by it breaking all the time. The app in question is an inventory / CRM application and currently each customer requires a new install of the app (usually accomplished by deploying it on a different domain on the same server and pointing to a new database).
Currently if any client wants any modifications to the forms such as additional fields, new features, etc my friend goes in and manually adds those fields to the forms, scripts, database etc. As a result all installs of this application are unique. There is no one singular source repository and no one single version of this app. Generally new features are overtime rolled into the other sites, but still this is done on an individual site by site basis.
I will be approaching this on a very modular basis. Initially I will be coding a module that will query an external web service for some data, display and store it, and periodically update it automatically. The next module will likely be for storing and displaying inventory data. This way I want to over time duplicate the current feature set of his app 100% but do it incrementally.
The Million Dollar Questions
I want to make the app have user
configurable form fields. The user
should be able to go to an admin
page, create a new forms page of a
certain category, and then specify
what fields he wants in there. He
could say 'create a new text field
called Item # and make it a
requirement" and that will get
stored somewhere. All forms will be
dynamically rendered to screen based
on what the user has configured. Is
this a good way to go about the
problem of having no idea what a
customer could want in a form? and
thus be able to store and display
form data of any sort ? What sort of
design pattern should I follow here?
I am familiar with asp.net and
the .net framework in general and
have decent knowledge of javascript,
html, silverlight, jquery, c# etc
etc. I can work my way around web
apps in a good way, but I am not
sure what sort of framework or tech
I should use to accomplish this
task. Would ASP.net 3.5 webforms be
the way to go? or should I look into
ASP.NET MVC? Do I use jquery and ajax for
complete decoupling of frontend and
backend ? or will a normal asp.net
page with some spattering of ajax
thrown in working with a codebehind
be the order of the day?
Just looking for general advice before I start.
I am currently thinking of using ASP.NET 3.5 webforms, jquery for clientside animation, ui, manipulation and data validation, and sqlserver + a .net or wcf webservice for backend.
Your advice is much appreciated as always.
I've recently implemented a white-label ecommerce system for an insurance company that allowed each partner to choose their own set of input fields, screens, and order the flow of the application to suit their individual needs.
Although it wasn't rocket science, it added complexity and increased development time.
Consider the user configuration aspect very carefully In hindsight both my client and their clients in turn, would have been happy with a more rigid system.
As for the tech side of your question, I developed my project in VS2005, using asp.net webforms and webservices with a SQLserver back end, so the stack that you're looking at is definitely capable of delivering a working product. ASP.net MVC will almost certainly help as far as testability goes.
The biggest thing I would change now if I was going to start again would be to replace the intermediate webservices with message based services using nServiceBus, MassTransit or the like. While the webservices worked fine, message based communication should be quicker and more reliable.
Finally, before you start to code, make sure that you understand the current system's functionality inside and out. If the new system doesn't do something that the old system did, it will be pretty obvious to the end users straight away.
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?