Survey Results

FirstPrevNext

Of Course I'll Use It - They Gave Me VB.Net Roger Wright21-Jun-04 3:49 Roger Wright 21-Jun-04 3:49  I intend to become a total .Net junky and annoy my friends by touting its virtues day and night, because Microsoft thoughtfully gave me a copy of a tool I could never hope to afford on the wages I can earn here. VB may suck, but I can't beat the price, and VS.Net is priced way beyond my budget. I've gone through the examples, have been appropriately impressed by the ease of use, and look forward to trying out web app development using it. Anything would be better than continuing to struggle with Visual InterDev. I'll be really impressed if I can successfully integrate David's BattleAxe Forums into a ASP.Net site. Some people think of it as a six-pack; I consider it more of a support group. Yes and no Nemanja Trifunovic21-Jun-04 2:23 Nemanja Trifunovic 21-Jun-04 2:23  My former boss and I were ".NET evangelists" within our company. We learned C# early, and used it where it really shines (ASP.NET front-end, small ad-hoc applications for XML processing, etc...). However, I would never use it for our core NLP libraries. For them, I need flexibility and power of umanaged C++, and libraries like Boost and Loki give me far more benefits than .NET BCL. For desktop apps, I have mixed feelings, but if I had to start developing a big desktop app at this time, I believe I would go with old, ugly MFC rather than .NET. Re: Yes and no Navin21-Jun-04 2:51 Navin 21-Jun-04 2:51  Nemanja Trifunovic wrote: I believe I would go with old, ugly MFC rather than .NET. I probably wouldn't go with .NET either, but I wouldn't go with MFC, I'd use wxWindows. It's biggest (possibly only??) disadvantage is that there aren't a ton of CodeProject articles on it. The annoying thing is, even if we get to the point where "everyone" is using .NET and most have the .NET framework on their machines, there will probably be multiple versions. So that headache will never go away. "Fish and guests stink in three days." - Benjamin Franlkin Re: Yes and no Jim Crafton21-Jun-04 7:25 Jim Crafton 21-Jun-04 7:25  I probably wouldn't go with .NET either, but I wouldn't go with MFC, I'd use wxWindows. No, no, no, no (shakes head sadly)...wrong answer! The correct answer (repeat after me): "I'd use the VCF[^], and make sure to share with everyone I know how truly wonderful, awe-inspiring, jaw-dropping, cracker barrel cool, and just generally terrifically enlightened it is." Thats the right answer ¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Re: Yes and no Bamaco221-Jun-04 10:28 Bamaco2 21-Jun-04 10:28  I have been looking for an excuse to use .NET I have a good story. About 2 years ago, I attempted to install .NET beta at home, to avoid interference with my machine at work fully populated with vc++ 6.0 and other libraries. Well, after about 60 minutes of installation (on a Win 2K machine), I got a message to the effect that the Windows Registry database was overflowed! It took me a while to search for a method to increase the registry database size - sorry, I don't have the url handy Eventually, I loaded the IDE. A bit nicer, much slower. Well, that was beta. Since then, I allowed my MSDN subscription to expire, and I want the latest version before I can fiddle aroud with it. Note that fiddeling is fine at home, but I have very little hope to get it to work at the shop. I have lots and lots of 3rd party libraries that will need to be updated (renewal $$$$) and my boss/partner requires some better explaination than "lets follow the hype with dot net" to throw out the money to keep all these things up to date, plus my own time, Don't believe it Jim A. Johnson21-Jun-04 2:00 Jim A. Johnson 21-Jun-04 2:00  I think that the results are inaccurate and based on a misunderstanding of the question. I use VS.NET, but do not use .NET. I think many of the positive responders were referring to VS.NET. Re: Don't believe it Rob Caldecott21-Jun-04 2:11 Rob Caldecott 21-Jun-04 2:11  Careful there Jim - some coward is voting my posts down without even bothering to offer an explanation! WTF is this site coming to? The Rob Blog Re: Don't believe it Navin21-Jun-04 2:49 Navin 21-Jun-04 2:49  I voted "No" because I use(d) VS.NET compiler, but not .NET (e.g., I was just using standard C++. No managed C++, C#, or anything.) There are a few in our company that do use C#, but it's for internal prototypes. We don't ship any .NET code becuase of the worrisome logistics (having to put a 20 meg redistributable either on the web or on an already cramped CD, and then trying to get it installed correctly.) And what I'm working on now isn't even on Windows anymore. Mono does look promising, but it's in beta (or alpha??) mode now. "Fish and guests stink in three days." - Benjamin Franlkin Re: Don't believe it Bob Aman22-Jun-04 5:05 Bob Aman 22-Jun-04 5:05  Mono recently hit Beta 2. If what you're trying to do is relatively uncomplicated, Mono is great, and the portability is wonderful! If it's more complicated, it can take a fair amount of effort to port over from .NET 1.1 Yes Ian Darling21-Jun-04 0:43 Ian Darling 21-Jun-04 0:43  For all sorts of stuff, too (mainly Web apps, but we've recently done some mobile apps in .NET too) I'm just doing an NT Service in .NET - and it's really straightforward Ian Darling The world is a thing of utter inordinate complexity ... that such complexity can arise ... out of such simplicity ... is the most fabulous extraordinary idea ... once you get some kind of inkling of how that might have happened - it's just wonderful ... the opportunity to spend 70 or 80 years of your life in such a universe is time well spent as far as I am concerned - Douglas Adams Re: Yes Rob Caldecott21-Jun-04 0:50 Rob Caldecott 21-Jun-04 0:50  >I'm just doing an NT Service in .NET - and it's really straightforward I recently knocked up some NT services in ATL7 - a breeze and no need for my users (NT4 users especially) to install a 20MB runtime. What benefits does .NET give you for writing NT services?? I can clearly see the benefits when it comes to web apps, but perhaps you can enlighten on what other benefits you are getting? The Rob Blog Re: Yes Rob Caldecott21-Jun-04 2:07 Rob Caldecott 21-Jun-04 2:07  WTF did someone vote this down without even the guts to explain themselves? The Rob Blog Re: Yes Ian Darling21-Jun-04 3:19 Ian Darling 21-Jun-04 3:19  Robert Edward Caldecott wrote: WTF did someone vote this down without even the guts to explain themselves? Don't ask me, I just saw your reply myself and didn't see what was wrong with it. I'm using .NET rather than ATL for this service precisely because my colleagues and I are much more familiar with .NET than ATL (historically we're mostly a VB/C shop - and what C++ code we've got is almost entirely MFC CE based). We've adopted .NET generally because for the environment we usually work in - mobile and web applications - .NET is more productive than the alternatives (although in the case of .NET Compact Framework, it's in many ways complete crap - but using that and VS2003 is waaaay better than fighting MFC CE and eVC, even if P/Invoke is a complete sod to use with some APIs). Ian Darling The world is a thing of utter inordinate complexity ... that such complexity can arise ... out of such simplicity ... is the most fabulous extraordinary idea ... once you get some kind of inkling of how that might have happened - it's just wonderful ... the opportunity to spend 70 or 80 years of your life in such a universe is time well spent as far as I am concerned - Douglas Adams Re: Yes Michael A. Barnhart22-Jun-04 1:47 Michael A. Barnhart 22-Jun-04 1:47  Ok, I have my sense of fair play so here is my five. Why? To restate what I read in your post: --> How many great developers ever even think of doing a business analysis first to see what is the best solution. Then the heck with the latest fad etc. do what is right for the problem. In my case we are doing web apps and integrating multiple systems with legacy and new services, Some are based off of .net and some are not. To me the #1 benefit is the usage of testing apps. Some are C++, C#, Java, and Pearl. If the Service only works with its native language I can point to a problem. I do not mind getting old. It beats all the other options that can think of. Only for language interoperability KevinHall20-Jun-04 23:36 KevinHall 20-Jun-04 23:36  I'm using .NET because of the convienience of language interoperability. I have no need for distributed applications; everything I create is still a good ol local .exe application. (That's a requirement of the industry I work in.) Web and bespoke Paul Watson20-Jun-04 22:46 Paul Watson 20-Jun-04 22:46  We do web-development and ASP.NET is awesome. We also use .NET for various Windows Services we have to build to support ASP.NET apps. We own and control our own hosting servers so don't have to rely on 3rd party hosting to have .NET. A new project is calling for handheld dev and I will be recommending the .NET Compact Framework especially as the app will be rolled out to brand new handhelds which we can spec and configure. If I did not have control over the target platform then I probably would not be using .NET yet as I would not like to be responsible for rolling it out to hundreds or thousands of desktops. regards, Paul Watson Bluegrass South Africa Ian Darling wrote: "and our loonies usually end up doing things like Monty Python." Crikey! ain't life grand? Re: Web and bespoke Rob Caldecott20-Jun-04 23:05 Rob Caldecott 20-Jun-04 23:05  >as I would not like to be responsible for rolling it out to hundreds or thousands of desktops. This would be a major issue for us - shipping a 20MB+ .NET runtime. It is amazing how many customers we have that still use Win9x clients - a download/install of this size would be simply unacceptable - and some of our customers have 10,000+ PCs. Most of my current development is in ATL/WTL - so no dependencies and small, easily distributed EXEs/DLLs. The Rob Blog Re: Web and bespoke SimonS21-Jun-04 19:57 SimonS 21-Jun-04 19:57  Robert Edward Caldecott wrote: we have that still use Win9x clients The other pain is the dependency on IE5.01 for those machines. .NET installs 100% on a clean W2K machine though. Cheers, Simon sig :: "Don't try to be like Jackie. There is only one Jackie.... Study computers instead.", Jackie Chan on career choices. article :: animation mechanics in SVG     blog:: brokenkeyboards "It'll be a cold day in Hell when I do VB.NET...", Chris Maunder Re: Web and bespoke Michael P Butler20-Jun-04 23:52 Michael P Butler 20-Jun-04 23:52  Paul Watson wrote: If I did not have control over the target platform then I probably would not be using .NET yet as I would not like to be responsible for rolling it out to hundreds or thousands of desktops. Why not? The size of download problem? , security issues? I'm actually amazed at how many sys-admins have actually rolled out .NET onto their desktop machines, even though they have no software requirement to do so. Michael CP Blog [^] Likely to start Linux programming first Rob Caldecott20-Jun-04 20:44 Rob Caldecott 20-Jun-04 20:44  .NET just doesn't feature on our radar at the moment . I have at least one NT server based app that customers would like to see ported to Linux, and I actually find this prospect quite exciting. Hence I can see myself switching from Windows to Linux development at some point in the next year or two. I am not convinced that MS have done a great job at selling the idea of .NET to the existing development community so I look forward to reading other comments posted here in the coming days. I am not anti-.NET - I just haven't been convinced that it is a technology I should be concentrating on. The Rob Blog Re: Likely to start Linux programming first Michael P Butler20-Jun-04 21:45 Michael P Butler 20-Jun-04 21:45  Robert Edward Caldecott wrote: am not convinced that MS have done a great job at selling the idea of .NET to the existing development community I agree. It wasn't until I started reading some of the C# articles here on CP that I realised how powerful C# was. Coming from MFC, the .NET UI classes still disappoint me as they lack the sophistication I have become accustomed to. However projects such as MyXaml[^] and Genghis[^] have helped overcome a lot of the shortcomings I found within .NET WinForms. Microsoft could help itself, if online MSDN and MSDN magazine stopped concentrating on technologies that we don't have (Longhorn etc) and started writing articles to show the average developer (the one with 2+ years of legacy code) what .NET can really do for them. For a supposedly pro-developer company, Microsoft fumbled the ball when selling .NET. However now I've started to use it on real projects, I find I don't want to go back. Michael CP Blog [^] Re: Likely to start Linux programming first Nemanja Trifunovic21-Jun-04 2:42 Nemanja Trifunovic 21-Jun-04 2:42  Michael P Butler wrote: Microsoft could help itself, if online MSDN and MSDN magazine stopped concentrating on technologies that we don't have (Longhorn etc) and started writing articles to show the average developer (the one with 2+ years of legacy code) what .NET can really do for them. Yep, all these Longhorn articles make me laugh. It will take probably 5+ years until I am in a position to actually use Longhorn technologies (not before Longhorn takes at least 50% of the market). Sorry, but none of my customers have Longhorn on their computers - they mostly use Windows 2000. Re: Likely to start Linux programming first Vladimir Ralev21-Jun-04 3:18 Vladimir Ralev 21-Jun-04 3:18  It looks like you dont appreciate the development time savings when using .NET (for some projects). In the IDE the code simply writes itself when you get on it. I can make a cross-platform(pc to pda) client server app in 10 minutes. If I had to use the old tools and the unwrapped sockets api it would have taken a week for me. I am strictly talking about networking apps here. Don't use it for image processing. Re: Likely to start Linux programming first Colin Angus Mackay21-Jun-04 10:17 Colin Angus Mackay 21-Jun-04 10:17  Vladimir Ralev wrote: In the IDE the code simply writes itself when you get on it. How do you get it to do that? I just created a new project and I sat there watching it. Then I thought maybe it was like an artist that doesn't like being watched so I went of and did something else for a while, but when I came back still nothing. I then realised that it didn't know what it was to do, so I wrote some comments at the top to let it know what I wanted it to produce (nothing fancy - just a little hello world type thing as a proof of concept you understand) and still nothing. I was getting worried I'd missed something so I looked in all the menus, and all the properties and all the options and I couldn't figure out what to do.... I've tried everything I can think of, so how do you get the IDE to write itself? "You can have everything in life you want if you will just help enough other people get what they want." --Zig Ziglar The Second EuroCPian Event will be in Brussels on the 4th of September Can't manage to P/Invoke that Win32 API in .NET? Why not do interop the wiki way! My Blog Re: Likely to start Linux programming first Vladimir Ralev21-Jun-04 10:33 Vladimir Ralev 21-Jun-04 10:33  Well, after setting up the class members you have to write(hehe) some code in the member functions. Everything starts with "this." or "System.". After pressing the "." a list of options appears, so you just type few letters and three enter and the whole name is written. Now I can do that very fast and more than 50% of the actual code pops from the list. That's what I am talking about.

Last Visit: 31-Dec-99 18:00     Last Update: 1-May-24 15:18 Refresh ᐊ Prev123456 Next ᐅ

General    News    Suggestion    Question    Bug    Answer    Joke    Praise    Rant    Admin   

Use Ctrl+Left/Right to switch messages, Ctrl+Up/Down to switch threads, Ctrl+Shift+Left/Right to switch pages.