| ActiveMac | Anonymous | Create a User | Reviews | News | Forums | Advertise |
|
|
|
User Controls |
|
New User |
|
Login |
|
Edit/View My Profile |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ActiveMac |
|
Articles |
|
Forums |
|
Links |
|
News |
|
News Search |
|
Reviews |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
News Centers |
|
Windows/Microsoft |
|
DVD |
|
ActiveHardware |
|
Xbox |
|
MaINTosh |
|
News Search |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ANet Chats |
|
The Lobby |
|
Special Events Room |
|
Developer's Lounge |
|
XBox Chat |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ's |
|
Windows 98/98 SE |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Windows Me |
|
Windows "Whistler" XP |
|
Windows CE |
|
Internet Explorer 6 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Xbox |
|
DirectX |
|
DVD's |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TopTechTips |
|
Registry Tips |
|
Windows 95/98 |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Internet Explorer 4 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Windows NT Tips |
|
Program Tips |
|
Easter Eggs |
|
Hardware |
|
DVD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Latest Reviews |
|
Applications |
|
Microsoft Windows XP Professional |
|
Norton SystemWorks 2002 |
|
|
|
Hardware |
|
Intel Personal Audio Player 3000 |
|
Microsoft Wireless IntelliMouse Explorer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Site News/Info |
|
About This Site |
|
Affiliates |
|
ANet Forums |
|
Contact Us |
|
Default Home Page |
|
Link To Us |
|
Links |
|
Member Pages |
|
Site Search |
|
Awards |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credits |
 |
Rearchitect Your Web Applications for Microsoft ASP.NET 2.0 | |
|
||
| Time: 00:37 EST/05:37 GMT | News Source: Microsoft | Posted By: Jonathan Tigner | ||
|
While ASP.NET 2.0 is completely backwards compatible with ASP.NET 1.1, its new features may require you to revise parts of your Web applications. This article provides a detailed analysis of how changes in ASP.NET 2.0 will influence your porting decisions. | ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 426 Last | Next |
The time now is
2:10:44 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #1 By 20 (67.9.179.51) at 6/10/2004 12:53:30 AM |
|
I'm actually starting to get nervous about Generics. I've been reading blogs and articles and it seems a lot of people don't really get the point of them and are going Generic-crazy and using them for all sorts of ill-intentioned purposes.
What was intended as a great feature will instead be maligned and used for evil and make code maintenance that much more difficult as you add another way for the idiot programmer to obfuscate his crappy code. *sigh*. Back to the article, though, I'm excited about ASP.NET. Unlike Generics, it's taking a lot of the low-level stuff out of the ASP monkey's hand and keeping it in the framework. ASP.NET was long overdue: An object-oriented component/composite-based HTML rendering framework. ASP.NET 2.0 is longer overdue: An enterprise web application framework that has all the crap you write and rewrite every project automagically built in. I'm sure all the Lintrolls will come out and claim that JThis and JThat java project does this already, but it sucks. I've used most every JThis and NThat framework out there for web stuff and they all have half a dozen nifty whiz-bang features but the rest is all lock-in crap that you can't use or prevents you from easily moving around to different frameworks. The innovation is finally taking all these pieces, putting them together, making them work and work well and be extensible and having them be all one-stop-shop without a lot of lock-in. |
| #2 By 2960 (156.80.64.137) at 6/10/2004 8:42:13 AM |
|
"While ASP.NET 2.0 is completely backwards compatible with ASP.NET 1.1, its new features may require you to revise parts of your Web applications. "
Only Microsoft could construct that sentence... TL |
| #3 By 2332 (66.228.91.12) at 6/10/2004 11:27:26 AM |
|
#9 - Did you go to school on the short bus when you were a kid?
Anyway... I'm not sure while you guys are worried about generics. How, exactly, would they be abused? I'm surprised more of you aren't all pissy about partial types and anonymous delegates. (I love partial types, but I'm not convinced at all about anonymous delegates.) Anyway, I'm looking forward to Whidbey for two big reasons: Bug fixes (oh, and there are a LOT), and team development improvements. (MSBuild, Team Services, etc.) |
| #4 By 19992 (164.214.4.61) at 6/10/2004 2:24:49 PM |
| Dee, there are two option Mono (mentioned above) and .GNU. It is true and I'm not sure of how it will actually happen, I'm not much of a coder. |
| #5 By 3339 (64.160.58.135) at 6/10/2004 8:48:05 PM |
| Come on, guys, end this retarded contest!! You might get some more advertisers by artificially inflating your hits, but your hits were decreasing because the site was starting to suck. All of these stupid articles with Mr. Dee sure to post some completely pointless comment are just making it suck more!! |
| #6 By 3339 (64.160.58.135) at 6/10/2004 10:16:41 PM |
| I'm having fun, are you? |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 426 Last | Next |
The time now is
2:10:44 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
