|
|
|
Sander Rossel wrote: Make that a raincoat 
Better than the other option (pampers / dodotis)  
M.D.V.
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
We are re-writing our Coldfusion intranet site. We are going to use asp.net MVC, but aren't sure weather to use Core or the Standard Framework.
If you were creating a new site today, which would you use?
We are more comfortable with the Standard Framework and are widows shop so cross platform isn't a major concern. The comfort mostly comes from product maturity and easily finding support for issues.
That being said, it sounds like Core is faster and where Microsoft is focusing its development efforts.
|
|
|
|
|
So, according to .NET Standard - Demystifying .NET Core and .NET Standard | Microsoft Docs[^]
The brief summary of the two are:
.NET Core: Used for building cross-platform console apps and ASP.NET Core Web apps and cloud services.
.NET Standard: Used for building libraries that can be referenced from all .NET implementations, such as .NET Framework, .NET Core and Xamarin.
So given that you're writing an ASP.NET application, I'd go for .NET Core, regardless of whether you're wanting to support cross-platform or not, as you're not really writing a library.
Hope that helps!
|
|
|
|
|
|
We're doing something similar - going from ASP.Net Web Forms to MVC5.
Even though our apps will be "on the cloud*, we are sticking with .Net Framework. Web apps don't need to be "cross-platform", IMHO, especially in an all-Windows shop.
Even if we do switch over to core in the future, it should be fairly easy to do - if you believe Microsoft's propaganda...
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
When you say "Standard Framework" are you referring to .NET Standard (the common denominator between .NET, .NET Core, Mono and Xamarin) or do you mean "the standard .NET that we've known for nearly two decades"?
If you're talking about .NET Standard, it's not a runtime so you can't write an application in it, only libraries.
In that case you clearly need .NET Core with perhaps .NET Standard libraries.
If you're talking about good old .NET, I'd still recommend .NET Core.
Personally, I've found moving from .NET to .NET Core very intuitive.
Dependency Injection comes out of the box, configuration files work with standard JSON (which allows nesting) and can be easily (strong typed) injected into your application.
Entity Framework Core has most of the regular EF and I've found it pretty easy to work with (code first).
If you're going for some basic CRUD stuff Razor Pages are fairly easy and intuitive without all the boiler plate of MVC.
If you're going for MVC I think they streamlined it a bit. No more Controller and ApiController, just one Controller and (JSON) API or HTML, it doesn't really matter anymore.
Considering Microsoft is continuing development for .NET Core and not the .NET Framework, it's a clear winner for me, .NET Core! 
|
|
|
|
|
My bad, I was talking about good old .NET.
In the test projects we made, working with MVC was very similar in each environment.
Thanks for you input!
|
|
|
|
|
I have been doing a mix of the two; my non-public service architecture is running on .Core, while my public sites are running on the full Framework.
Eventually I'll migrate to Core for the front-ends, but I have quite a few HttpModules that need conversion to Middle Ware; and that has been a bumpy path.
Director of Transmogrification Services
Shinobi of Query Language
Master of Yoda Conditional
|
|
|
|
|
The great thing about starting new code in Core is... You don't have to make every. single. google search for dotNET information using negated keywords at the end (like me):
web api auth -Core -Membership
P.S. Microsoft evidently hates developers when they name things:
• standard
• nuget packages.core (old-meaning of core libraries)
@jaygeek
|
|
|
|
|
Blazor (server side now, client side later if you wish) built on .NET Core 3.x.
Before long, .NET Core and .NET Framework will become just .NET 5. Going with Core and Blazor now will save you headaches down the road.
|
|
|
|
|
Going with Silverlight now will save you headaches down the road. - Almost everyone pushing towards the latest technology, Circa. 2008
-= Reelix =-
|
|
|
|
|
Among the differences:
- Silverlight was proprietary while webassembly (wasm) is open source.
- Silverlight was not supported by all major browsers, wasm is.
- Portions of Silverlight still live on in other technologies, and work in harmony with wasm.
Most of today's fragmented JavaScript frameworks did not even exist in 2008.
And you provided a supposed quote with no context.
All that together pretty much makes your response worthless.
|
|
|
|
|
I use .NET standard for my "shared code": which I use in console, WPF and UWP.
You're closing a door by committing any "shared code" to .NET Core or .NET Framework.
So, my "model" (code) is certainly a candidate for a shared Standard dll.
It was only in wine that he laid down no limit for himself, but he did not allow himself to be confused by it.
― Confucian Analects: Rules of Confucius about his food
|
|
|
|
|
Is a sad coffee a Despresso?
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
from a civet cat that just got "fixed"?
this internet has become nothing but fake news.
... time to fix it, time to get back to the fax!
|
|
|
|
|
Speaking off decaf, I'd bean thinking about it and could say there are a latte reasons to think so.
| Ravings en masse^ |
|---|
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, apparently it's bean brewing for a while now.
"the debugger doesn't tell me anything because this code compiles just fine" - random QA comment
"Facebook is where you tell lies to your friends. Twitter is where you tell the truth to strangers." - chriselst
"I don't drink any more... then again, I don't drink any less." - Mike Mullikins uncle
|
|
|
|
|
I Doppio that
In Word you can only store 2 bytes. That is why I use Writer.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Good question! Those kind of questions tend to grind on me.
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, you must steam the milk first then wait until it phase changes through anger to depression before use.
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm not so sure I want a bunch of kids playing Ghostbusters. I could probably have got on board with 17-18 (late high school) at a push, but they just seem too young.
It's fine if they wan't to target the younger audience, and I am sure the film will be "ok" too. Just not quite what I had hoped for.
Also wasn't too impressed by the attempts at humour in the trailer. Nothing worse than a so-called comedy that isn't funny - so I hope it doesn't end up being that.
Expected rating: 6/10
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
![Java | [Coffee]](https://codeproject.global.ssl.fastly.net/script/Forums/Images/coffee.gif)