|
Here's some great places to find great "Visual Studio.NET" and "ASP+" and "C#" information:
http://63.192.218.207/dotnetfaq/ (famous questions and answers from Developmentor's DOTNET mailing list).
http://www.devx.com/free/press/2000/vsresources.asp (List of more than 100 Web sites and conferences and other information sources -- all about Visual Studio.NET and ASP+).
http://www.andymcm.com/dotnetfaq.htm (DOTNET FAQ).
Robert Scoble
http://www.vslive.com <<--This Fall's Largest Visual Studio Conference
|
|
|
|
|
I am just curious, but why are you guys so against C# and .NET? Is it because you have seen the specifications and have decided that it doesn't help you in any way, or is just that you heard the buzz and your first emotional response is negative?
I am not in any way saying that C# and .NET are good or bad. I just want to know what you guys are basing your opinions on
|
|
|
|
|
I agree with you that most of us react emotional. But I was at Tech*ED Europe and heard the last news about al the .NET stuff. Why .NET? Because SUN uses .COM as 'the dot in COM'? What about new technologie? C# is not new. It's just another language like Java. But if it is given a new name it's new technologie? On Tech*ED I heard Microsoft saying OLEDB is legacy, ADO+ is the way to go! Come on! Everybody knows that ADO is sitting on top of OLEDB. Why do they want to change names and technologie every year? I was seriously thinking to move to Linux, because that technologie has proven itself and doesn't change that fast. I am a Microsoftie and a professional programmer, but I cannot adopt the new stuff from Redmond that fast. Beside that I like to know how many people do only WEB programming. That's what Microsoft claims. Only Internet is important in the future. I wander..
|
|
|
|
|
I couldn't of put this any better.
I'm any senior developer and I have been programming for Windows since '93. I too feel that the technology is moving way to fast. Microsoft seems to invent a new technology every month, it makes it very difficult esp. when starting a new project on deciding which technology to use, as it could easy be outdated (Not good for the customer).
I will not move to a different programming platform, but I will be hesitant in diving into a new technology that may or maynot be superceeded in several months down the line
|
|
|
|
|
>> I will be hesitant in diving into a new technology
>> that may or maynot be superceeded in several months
>> down the line.
You don't have to. This is one area that I think Microsoft has done better than most OS vendors. I have programs I have written in DOS in the late '80s that run on NT/2000 today. COM components and ActiveX controls will still be supported (and usable from the .NET platform) for a long time. COM and the Win32 API will be around for a long time. So, you can move to the "new" technology when you are ready. What's wrong with that?
Regarding invention of new technology every "month". This is one of the reasons I like this industry so much. There is always something new to learn.  Seriously, if there is a new technology that is more complex but allows me to provide some unique value to my customers then I can go along with that (COM and MTS). However, if there is a new technology that promises to vastly simplify what was complex and at the same time provide at least the same (if not more) capabilities and potential for customer value, well then I am all over that.
Until you have had a chance to experiment with the class libraries, the CLR and one of the languages that sit on top of the CLR, I urge you to reserve judgement. It is easy to criticize something that is a vague and nebulous thing. This is one area that I think the MS marketing machine has failed so far. They need to craft a message and spread it to developers regarding "why a developer would want to use the .NET technologies". At the PDC, we got that message pretty clearly but MS needs to spread it to more than just the 6000 developers that showed up at the PDC
|
|
|
|
|
I think that .NET and its underlying technologies are a big leap forward for both the programmers (I mean, purely the fact that we don't have to bother with GUIDs in the new languages etc. is great), and for the customer, who will no longer have to worry about where their information is - they will be able to access from wherever they are. The fact that the information will be based around XML etc. is also great, because it means that the presentation of the data will be appropriate no matter what the form factor of the device it is being viewed on is. I'm not saying that technologies from other frays (Linux/Unix etc) are bad, but this is great - and as yet nobody has really challenged it with something of similar ambition. And for once you can say that Microsoft are monopolising this because anyone will be able to produce apps and services that are based on this technology.
|
|
|
|
|
>> I will be hesitant in diving into a new technology
>> that may or maynot be superceeded in several months
>> down the line.
You don't have to. This is one area that I think Microsoft has done better than most OS vendors. I have programs I have written in DOS in the late '80s that run on NT/2000 today. COM components and ActiveX controls will still be supported (and usable from the .NET platform) for a long time. COM and the Win32 API will be around for a long time. So, you can move to the "new" technology when you are ready. What's wrong with that?
Regarding invention of new technology every "month". This is one of the reasons I like this industry so much. There is always something new to learn. Seriously, if there is a new technology that is more complex but allows me to provide some unique value to my customers then I can go along with that (COM and MTS). However, if there is a new technology that promises to vastly simplify what was complex and at the same time provide at least the same (if not more) capabilities and potential for customer value, well then I am all over that.
Until you have had a chance to experiment with the class libraries, the CLR and one of the languages that sit on top of the CLR, I urge you to reserve judgement. It is easy to criticize something that is a vague and nebulous thing. This is one area that I think the MS marketing machine has failed so far. They need to craft a message and spread it to developers regarding "why a developer would want to use the .NET technologies". At the PDC, we got that message pretty clearly but MS needs to spread it to more than just the 6000 developers that showed up at the PDC
|
|
|
|
|
I think this is a classic case of why younger generations are desired so much in our industry. Us old farts say "This technology is moving too fast, and I can't or won't keep up" while the early 20 somethings jump on every new technology that comes along.
Maybe age discrimination isn't discrimination at all...
|
|
|
|
|
The really cool thing about the .NET technologies is that it will make programming simpler. At least for us C/C++ types. Check out the following program. It is about 24 lines and displays a bitmap in the main window. Think about how many lines of code that would take you in C++/Win32 API or even C++/MFC. Now, I will agree with you that while COM is neat too, it is a much harder pill to swallow (GUIDs, IDL, apartments, IUnknown, IDispatch, etc).
<br />
using System;<br />
using System.Drawing;<br />
using System.WinForms;<br />
<br />
public class MainWindow : System.WinForms.Form {<br />
private System.Drawing.Bitmap m_bitmap;<br />
<br />
public MainWindow() {<br />
this.AutoScaleBaseSize = new System.Drawing.Size(5, 13);<br />
this.Text = "Display Bitmap";<br />
this.ClientSize = new System.Drawing.Size(600, 480);<br />
m_bitmap = new<br />
Bitmap(@"c:\tmp\EricaAndJeremy.jpg");<br />
}<br />
<br />
protected override void OnPaint(PaintEventArgs e) {<br />
e.Graphics.DrawImage(m_bitmap, 10,<br />
10);<br />
}<br />
<br />
public static void Main() {<br />
Application.Run(new MainWindow());<br />
}<br />
}
|
|
|
|
|
Let me try that one more time and see if it is more readable.
<br />
using System;<br />
using System.Drawing;<br />
using System.WinForms;<br />
<br />
public class MainWindow : System.WinForms.Form {<br />
private System.Drawing.Bitmap m_bitmap;<br />
<br />
public MainWindow() {<br />
this.AutoScaleBaseSize = new System.Drawing.Size(5, 13);<br />
this.Text = "Display Bitmap";<br />
this.ClientSize = new System.Drawing.Size(600, 480);<br />
m_bitmap = new Bitmap(@"c:\tmp\EricaAndJeremy.jpg" );<br />
}<br />
<br />
protected override void OnPaint(PaintEventArgs e) {<br />
e.Graphics.DrawImage(m_bitmap, 10,10);<br />
}<br />
<br />
public static void Main() {<br />
Application.Run(new MainWindow());<br />
}<br />
}
|
|
|
|
|
Just in case some one wants to build this. The make file is pretty simple too.
all: DisplayBitmap.exe<br />
<br />
DisplayBitmap.exe: DisplayBitmap.cs<br />
csc /debug+ /t:winexe DisplayBitmap.cs \<br />
/r:system.dll /r:system.drawing.dll \<br />
/r:System.WinForms.dll \<br />
/r:Microsoft.Win32.Interop.dll
|
|
|
|
|
|
No templates for example.
A very good reason to be a C++ programmer.
I will remain a C++ programmer. I love C++. I really like to have control over an application! With C# you will never have the control.
I like Java. But the reason I like Java is "Write once, run anywhere!". And that's all!
Uncle Sa
|
|
|
|
|
There are only two options. I think that a couple of other options would be better like:
O - Yes, I'm going to use it
O - Yes, eventually I will *have* to use it!
O - No, but I like the environment
O - No, I think such environments make developers work less interesting
|
|
|
|
|
In my humble and unabashedly frank opinion, when people stubbornly cling to technologies which are going away and refuse to adapt to and learn new technologies, it makes it all the more harder to get a job these days...
People should quit b**tching about the new "vaporware from Microsoft," C#, .NET, et al, because that's what old people like to do. If you want to have jobs re-writing legacy code to less-legacy languages (KOBOL to C++), then fine. If you want to market yourself to all the .coms which want Weblications and storefronts and whatever else, implemented in the latest technology, then good luck :
|
|
|
|
|
In my humble and unabashedly frank opinion, when people cling to new technologies without fully evaluating them first, it makes it all the more harder to convince management that the tools we use now are Just Fine™
People aren't bitching about .NET, they're just saying; "let's see it, then we'll decide whether it's worth using".
I'm making "Weblications and storefronts and whatever else" today, without the help of C# and .NET. I want to see for myself exactly what advantages new technology will bring me before I get all giddy about it.
|
|
|
|
|
>> I'm making "Weblications and storefronts and whatever else" today, without the help of C# and .NET. I want to see for myself exactly what advantages new technology will bring me before I get all giddy about it. <<
Just like you could listen to music on tape or vinyl before CDs came about?
|
|
|
|
|
Your Poll misses the "At least I'll have a look" option - but then, the "Yes" wouldn't get too many votes..
|
|
|
|
|
.NET is not the sort of thing you take a casual glance at. The choice as to whether you want to upgrade to Visual Studio 7, or Microsoft Office.NET, or write websites that interact with each other, comes down to a simple yes/no. The reaction to Microsoft's announcement was fairly negative, but when it comes to the crunch, is that how people really feel?
I want to publish articles and news items that the readers of CodeProject are interested in. If I spend months posting C#, .NET, ASP+ articles etc but no one intends to actually use this stuff, then I'm not responding to what you guys need.
I figured it would be an interesting change to the usual gradient of options :
|
|
|
|
|
FYI, "Will you use?" should be "Will you use it?"
From what I've talked with people who DIDN'T attend the Microsoft Love Fest recently, they could care less about C# and REALLY want to have all the C++ issues fixed with the compiler and the bugs in the IDE. I'm hearing a lot of "C#==Java" all over the place, and from what I've read in the documentation, that's basically it. I didn't see anything in the documentation that Perl doesn't already do, and do better. I won't mention Perl's track record, open source-ness, etc.
The cold hard truth is that people have gone ga-ga over "web development" - just like they did with Java when it was announced, and this is what investors and the media grab onto, but for the rest of the world, we're still doing C++ development. I don't see C# being used to write Windows apps or device drivers. I wouldn't use Java or Visual Basic to make a first person shooter, for example.
|
|
|
|
|
Chris,
I'm looking forward to .NET and C# (and hope to get hands on a beta with my this year's TechnetPlus - but I'm afraid this is in vain...)
We will use it on a test machine, play around, try to get our current project running there, see how it works, build one component in C#, but the main machines will stay VC6 until we see what .NET looks after the waves reached the beach... there's just too much white noise out there. I still remember the pain we had with 3rd party code when moving from VC5 to VC6.
And I'd guess many will behave this way. Everybody is so suspicous about MS visions..
We're not in web dev business (it wouldn't pay for us, and no real advantage for our clients), we use plain COM on the local machine, so there is no outside pressure for us to upgrade; but hell, yes there are tons of companies out there that just HAVE to try. And I'd guess sooner or later, we need to say "yes" or sink the ship..
Yes, this strict yes/no was the main cause making me.. confused. Although you often get an "option missing" for the polls, this time it was beatifully extreme.
Regards,
Pete
|
|
|
|
|
With all due respect, the poll is too "black and white". I don't know of too many companies with more than 1 or 2 employees that are going to say "yes" or "no" to adopting a whole new approach to distributed applications development based on the little that has been released thus far.
IMHO, a more practical poll might have been "Do you plan on evaluating .NET as a viable development and implementation platform in the next year"
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
