In bad mood and don't want to spoil the party, but:
-
In bad mood and don't want to spoil the party, but: Let me ask you guys: Am I the only one here that recently feel like all that .NET hype is just and only the hype?... At least on desktop site?... Am I alone on that? As I see obvious advantages of using CLR on server site, I personally completely missunderstand and disagree with the concept on the client: Yes sure, language is important, but real serious client products evolving usually not in one night, but growing slowly and utilizing OS specifics, becoming at some point contrary to OOP and still fulfilling the task. Could anybody help me finding out recent CLR implementations of something more complicated then just UserControl and/or Tool for software development. Something like small Excel and/or ActiveX(or WinForm) TestContainer and etc... Maybe some application resolving some real business problems... I'm talking about DeskTop (Client site) only solution. Thank you.
-
In bad mood and don't want to spoil the party, but: Let me ask you guys: Am I the only one here that recently feel like all that .NET hype is just and only the hype?... At least on desktop site?... Am I alone on that? As I see obvious advantages of using CLR on server site, I personally completely missunderstand and disagree with the concept on the client: Yes sure, language is important, but real serious client products evolving usually not in one night, but growing slowly and utilizing OS specifics, becoming at some point contrary to OOP and still fulfilling the task. Could anybody help me finding out recent CLR implementations of something more complicated then just UserControl and/or Tool for software development. Something like small Excel and/or ActiveX(or WinForm) TestContainer and etc... Maybe some application resolving some real business problems... I'm talking about DeskTop (Client site) only solution. Thank you.
Are you the only one? Probably not, but I certainly disagree. We've been building WinForm apps where I work for the last six months to solve "real business problems" and couldn't imagine going back to our "old" ways (99.9% web-based solutions). The rich-client environment of WinForm apps lets us do things we simply could not have reasonably done in a web-based app. Our users are happier, our developers are happier and the projects are starting to get done faster and with more features than we could have done before. With the ease of deployment granted to us by the .NET Framework, we don't even think about that aspect when deciding between ASP.NET and WinForms. This doesn't mean we've stopped developing web-based solutions. It just means we no longer shy away from client-side solutions any longer. Whichever makes the most sense for the project, that's the one we use. That freedom of choice came from .NET, as it leveled the pros/cons list for us between the two types of deployments. Ryan LaNeve www.laneve.com[^]
-
In bad mood and don't want to spoil the party, but: Let me ask you guys: Am I the only one here that recently feel like all that .NET hype is just and only the hype?... At least on desktop site?... Am I alone on that? As I see obvious advantages of using CLR on server site, I personally completely missunderstand and disagree with the concept on the client: Yes sure, language is important, but real serious client products evolving usually not in one night, but growing slowly and utilizing OS specifics, becoming at some point contrary to OOP and still fulfilling the task. Could anybody help me finding out recent CLR implementations of something more complicated then just UserControl and/or Tool for software development. Something like small Excel and/or ActiveX(or WinForm) TestContainer and etc... Maybe some application resolving some real business problems... I'm talking about DeskTop (Client site) only solution. Thank you.
I'm working on a couple different projects, from a desktop app to a large GUI Library, and LOVING IT! Just keep learning, and you'll probably see the picture. If you're happier with some other technology, however, just go ahead and use it. :)
"Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God." - Jesus
"You must be the change you wish to see in the world." - Mahatma Gandhi -
In bad mood and don't want to spoil the party, but: Let me ask you guys: Am I the only one here that recently feel like all that .NET hype is just and only the hype?... At least on desktop site?... Am I alone on that? As I see obvious advantages of using CLR on server site, I personally completely missunderstand and disagree with the concept on the client: Yes sure, language is important, but real serious client products evolving usually not in one night, but growing slowly and utilizing OS specifics, becoming at some point contrary to OOP and still fulfilling the task. Could anybody help me finding out recent CLR implementations of something more complicated then just UserControl and/or Tool for software development. Something like small Excel and/or ActiveX(or WinForm) TestContainer and etc... Maybe some application resolving some real business problems... I'm talking about DeskTop (Client site) only solution. Thank you.
The marketing fluff:substance ratio has been a little high but it's definitely worth getting past that. .NET is truly fun to work in, but it also definitely has it's pitfalls (which, in a way, can add to the fun). Keep your eyes and your mind open - it's worth the trip. cheers, Chris Maunder
-
Are you the only one? Probably not, but I certainly disagree. We've been building WinForm apps where I work for the last six months to solve "real business problems" and couldn't imagine going back to our "old" ways (99.9% web-based solutions). The rich-client environment of WinForm apps lets us do things we simply could not have reasonably done in a web-based app. Our users are happier, our developers are happier and the projects are starting to get done faster and with more features than we could have done before. With the ease of deployment granted to us by the .NET Framework, we don't even think about that aspect when deciding between ASP.NET and WinForms. This doesn't mean we've stopped developing web-based solutions. It just means we no longer shy away from client-side solutions any longer. Whichever makes the most sense for the project, that's the one we use. That freedom of choice came from .NET, as it leveled the pros/cons list for us between the two types of deployments. Ryan LaNeve www.laneve.com[^]
Ryan, If it's not a secret: what specifics of CLR are you using? So, you are saying it's WinForm App -- so what stopped you from doing it before as deployable ActiveX solution? Or maybe you are utilizing previously VB programmers? I'm trying to figure out for myself, exactly what would be the reason of moving into CLR on desktop? Also, you are saying that this is replacement for previously 99.9% web based solution -- no I'm talking about not NET/Web related systems. Like for example CAD system, or Motion Control system or real time trading/brokerage system. So, if such system already exist, so you don't have to write it: and if it's already one of the best in the industry: What would be an advantage of rewriting it in CLR? Also, Ryan: you are saying that you "no longer shy away from client-side solutions any longer" -- I want to know, not just theoretically, but practically: Are you in charge of upgrading your customers desktops and installing .NET Frameworks there? Because, unfortunately for me: I have customers who are still running IE 4.0 on WinNT 3.2 and IT departments there are not willing to move and I'm in no position to move them. And let me tell you: it's pretty huge customers. Let's hope someday they will be forced to, but when and how? Anyway, thanx evrybody for replies.
-
The marketing fluff:substance ratio has been a little high but it's definitely worth getting past that. .NET is truly fun to work in, but it also definitely has it's pitfalls (which, in a way, can add to the fun). Keep your eyes and your mind open - it's worth the trip. cheers, Chris Maunder
Chris Maunder wrote: NET is truly fun to work in You mean just like upgrading a VS 2K2 C# project to 2K3 just to figure out the code doesn't compile any more. Come on Christ. As long as I see people talking personal projects, I believe .NET is fun. As soon as we speak real world stuff, VS.NET is the crappiest thing I have seen. The rate of breaking changes is so high that .NET 2.0 due in 2004 will again break project files, source code, behaviors, etc. The ROI is halfed from published expectations IMHO.
-
Are you the only one? Probably not, but I certainly disagree. We've been building WinForm apps where I work for the last six months to solve "real business problems" and couldn't imagine going back to our "old" ways (99.9% web-based solutions). The rich-client environment of WinForm apps lets us do things we simply could not have reasonably done in a web-based app. Our users are happier, our developers are happier and the projects are starting to get done faster and with more features than we could have done before. With the ease of deployment granted to us by the .NET Framework, we don't even think about that aspect when deciding between ASP.NET and WinForms. This doesn't mean we've stopped developing web-based solutions. It just means we no longer shy away from client-side solutions any longer. Whichever makes the most sense for the project, that's the one we use. That freedom of choice came from .NET, as it leveled the pros/cons list for us between the two types of deployments. Ryan LaNeve www.laneve.com[^]
-
Ryan, If it's not a secret: what specifics of CLR are you using? So, you are saying it's WinForm App -- so what stopped you from doing it before as deployable ActiveX solution? Or maybe you are utilizing previously VB programmers? I'm trying to figure out for myself, exactly what would be the reason of moving into CLR on desktop? Also, you are saying that this is replacement for previously 99.9% web based solution -- no I'm talking about not NET/Web related systems. Like for example CAD system, or Motion Control system or real time trading/brokerage system. So, if such system already exist, so you don't have to write it: and if it's already one of the best in the industry: What would be an advantage of rewriting it in CLR? Also, Ryan: you are saying that you "no longer shy away from client-side solutions any longer" -- I want to know, not just theoretically, but practically: Are you in charge of upgrading your customers desktops and installing .NET Frameworks there? Because, unfortunately for me: I have customers who are still running IE 4.0 on WinNT 3.2 and IT departments there are not willing to move and I'm in no position to move them. And let me tell you: it's pretty huge customers. Let's hope someday they will be forced to, but when and how? Anyway, thanx evrybody for replies.
igor1960 wrote: so what stopped you from doing it before as deployable ActiveX solution Complexity. It takes a lot of work to implement the interfaces correctly. it's a utter pain to convert exceptions to IErrorInfo's that are converted back to exceptions at every Interface boundary. igor1960 wrote: I'm trying to figure out for myself, exactly what would be the reason of moving into CLR on desktop? A consistent, well documented UI library. MFC is a pain, and mroe often than not in my way. WTL is nice, but largely undocumented. CLR + C#, provides a fairly beginner-proof environment (which means: easier to hire people). the CLR distribution is still a big hindrance for .NET applications to catch on. Yet, this will smooth out (I hope). As for customers not willing to upgrade - well, this could justify everybody sticks to Win 3.11 development... ;P
"Der Geist des Kriegers ist erwacht / Ich hab die Macht" StS
sighist | Agile Programming | doxygen -
Chris Maunder wrote: NET is truly fun to work in You mean just like upgrading a VS 2K2 C# project to 2K3 just to figure out the code doesn't compile any more. Come on Christ. As long as I see people talking personal projects, I believe .NET is fun. As soon as we speak real world stuff, VS.NET is the crappiest thing I have seen. The rate of breaking changes is so high that .NET 2.0 due in 2004 will again break project files, source code, behaviors, etc. The ROI is halfed from published expectations IMHO.
>> The rate of breaking changes is so high that .NET 2.0 due in 2004 will again break project files, source code, behaviors, etc << That's another problem I see: just check attached code to C# section here at CodeProject -- at least half of project examples presented here are not capable of loading into DevStudio... That's sure fun! LOL. You are right: imagine commercial project presenting you one day with such surprise! Hope you didn't pay for it.
-
Are you the only one? Probably not, but I certainly disagree. We've been building WinForm apps where I work for the last six months to solve "real business problems" and couldn't imagine going back to our "old" ways (99.9% web-based solutions). The rich-client environment of WinForm apps lets us do things we simply could not have reasonably done in a web-based app. Our users are happier, our developers are happier and the projects are starting to get done faster and with more features than we could have done before. With the ease of deployment granted to us by the .NET Framework, we don't even think about that aspect when deciding between ASP.NET and WinForms. This doesn't mean we've stopped developing web-based solutions. It just means we no longer shy away from client-side solutions any longer. Whichever makes the most sense for the project, that's the one we use. That freedom of choice came from .NET, as it leveled the pros/cons list for us between the two types of deployments. Ryan LaNeve www.laneve.com[^]
Ryan LaNeve wrote: Our users are happier, our developers are happier and the projects are starting to get done faster and with more features than we could have done before. Didn't anyone propose to use Java and Swing?... Not that I don't like C#, and though it is somewhat of a copy of AWT, I think WinForms is a more powerfull tool. But Java has been here for a loong time, so it seems a bit odd that a company should shy away from the obvious benefits of using Java, and then embrace the .NET solution for the exactly same reasons? "After all it's just text at the end of the day. - Colin Davies "For example, when a VB programmer comes to my house, they may say 'does your pool need cleaning, sir ?' " - Christian Graus
-
igor1960 wrote: so what stopped you from doing it before as deployable ActiveX solution Complexity. It takes a lot of work to implement the interfaces correctly. it's a utter pain to convert exceptions to IErrorInfo's that are converted back to exceptions at every Interface boundary. igor1960 wrote: I'm trying to figure out for myself, exactly what would be the reason of moving into CLR on desktop? A consistent, well documented UI library. MFC is a pain, and mroe often than not in my way. WTL is nice, but largely undocumented. CLR + C#, provides a fairly beginner-proof environment (which means: easier to hire people). the CLR distribution is still a big hindrance for .NET applications to catch on. Yet, this will smooth out (I hope). As for customers not willing to upgrade - well, this could justify everybody sticks to Win 3.11 development... ;P
"Der Geist des Kriegers ist erwacht / Ich hab die Macht" StS
sighist | Agile Programming | doxygenHi, Peter: >> It takes a lot of work to implement the interfaces correctly. it's a utter pain to convert exceptions to IErrorInfo's that are converted back to exceptions at every Interface boundary. << I'm confused here: we are talking about ActiveX controls: You don't have to implement interfaces if you are using MFC/ATL like environments -- you are implementing methods/properties and events. Same thing you do when using WinForm Controls. Your statemet maybe of value implementing pure COM components, but the same is true if you do it in CLR and want to process all possible results, not just Try at the beginning and catch at the end.... >> A consistent, well documented UI library. MFC is a pain, and mroe often than not in my way. WTL is nice, but largely undocumented. << The problem is: while unified UI is definitely important -- it's not only UI that constitutes the program. While you are saying that MFC is a pain -- at least it's a higher level interface not just to UI, but to some OS standard functionality. For example: Imagine writing today something like WinForm Test Container which is analog to ActiveX TstCon. Now: MFC since OLE1 had InsertObject dialog -- could you give me an example of such in CLR? Or you may say we can write our own: but if you do and tommorow MSFT comes with there own solution -- you waisted your time. >> CLR + C#, provides a fairly beginner-proof environment (which means: easier to hire people). << Here, you maybe right, however the same people should write sometimes not simple busines part -- or you will hire another set? >> As for customers not willing to upgrade - well, this could justify everybody sticks to Win 3.11 development << The main reason some of our customers are not willing to upgrade is because they are still using some old applications that are not supported/working in latest version of Windows. However, those applications are very important -- noway you can force those customers out of them. Thank you for your responce
-
>> The rate of breaking changes is so high that .NET 2.0 due in 2004 will again break project files, source code, behaviors, etc << That's another problem I see: just check attached code to C# section here at CodeProject -- at least half of project examples presented here are not capable of loading into DevStudio... That's sure fun! LOL. You are right: imagine commercial project presenting you one day with such surprise! Hope you didn't pay for it.
igor1960 wrote: check attached code to C# section here at CodeProject Not only C#. MFC and ATL sections are also somewhat broken. This follows a strategic trend : MS, and on behalf of them all MS related sites including CodeProject (whether they regret it now or not), are willing customers to upgrade to the very latest technology. This is in contradiction with reliable software stacks. <paranoia or true fact, I let you choose>According to me, it is only going to worsen, as next VS.NET releases are more integrated than ever with other MS products (SQL server, Visio, Office, ...). Last words, next MS releases are to include more DRM than ever. At some point, it will not be possible to view some document, execute some app, install some software without relying on MS $credentials$ : Passport, certifications, etc. </paranoia or true fact, I let you choose>
-
Ryan LaNeve wrote: Our users are happier, our developers are happier and the projects are starting to get done faster and with more features than we could have done before. Didn't anyone propose to use Java and Swing?... Not that I don't like C#, and though it is somewhat of a copy of AWT, I think WinForms is a more powerfull tool. But Java has been here for a loong time, so it seems a bit odd that a company should shy away from the obvious benefits of using Java, and then embrace the .NET solution for the exactly same reasons? "After all it's just text at the end of the day. - Colin Davies "For example, when a VB programmer comes to my house, they may say 'does your pool need cleaning, sir ?' " - Christian Graus
jan larsen wrote: the obvious benefits of using Java Oh.. the fact that it can manage to turn a 2.4 GigHz Pentium 4 into the equivalent of a Commodore 64!! I've been using Java a lot here lately and while I do enjoy programming it* I find it just way too slow. Having two or 3 java apps [not my apps] running can kill my machine [2.4 P4,512MB Ram]. For example if I try to use eclipse and tomcat on this machine for any reasonable length of time [upwards of 6 hours] both apps are using over 100MB each after that length of time!!! It's ridiculous! And yes.. I've tried different VM's to see if it made a difference and it doesn't. The garbage collection just doesn't seem to work! *I'll probably be shot for saying that Regards, Brian Dela :-)
-
Chris Maunder wrote: NET is truly fun to work in You mean just like upgrading a VS 2K2 C# project to 2K3 just to figure out the code doesn't compile any more. Come on Christ. As long as I see people talking personal projects, I believe .NET is fun. As soon as we speak real world stuff, VS.NET is the crappiest thing I have seen. The rate of breaking changes is so high that .NET 2.0 due in 2004 will again break project files, source code, behaviors, etc. The ROI is halfed from published expectations IMHO.
-
In bad mood and don't want to spoil the party, but: Let me ask you guys: Am I the only one here that recently feel like all that .NET hype is just and only the hype?... At least on desktop site?... Am I alone on that? As I see obvious advantages of using CLR on server site, I personally completely missunderstand and disagree with the concept on the client: Yes sure, language is important, but real serious client products evolving usually not in one night, but growing slowly and utilizing OS specifics, becoming at some point contrary to OOP and still fulfilling the task. Could anybody help me finding out recent CLR implementations of something more complicated then just UserControl and/or Tool for software development. Something like small Excel and/or ActiveX(or WinForm) TestContainer and etc... Maybe some application resolving some real business problems... I'm talking about DeskTop (Client site) only solution. Thank you.
I can not understand how there are advantages for straight desktop apps with .NET. It doesn't seem logical to me that we should be building client apps with equipment designed for creating server apps. Something is definitly wrong with this mentality. My guess is that we will see a total new version of *.NET* released in the future for desktop apps alone. Regardz Colin J Davies
*** WARNING *
This could be addictive
**The minion's version of "Catch :bob: "It's a real shame that people as stupid as you can work out how to use a computer. said by Christian Graus in the Soapbox
-
jan larsen wrote: the obvious benefits of using Java Oh.. the fact that it can manage to turn a 2.4 GigHz Pentium 4 into the equivalent of a Commodore 64!! I've been using Java a lot here lately and while I do enjoy programming it* I find it just way too slow. Having two or 3 java apps [not my apps] running can kill my machine [2.4 P4,512MB Ram]. For example if I try to use eclipse and tomcat on this machine for any reasonable length of time [upwards of 6 hours] both apps are using over 100MB each after that length of time!!! It's ridiculous! And yes.. I've tried different VM's to see if it made a difference and it doesn't. The garbage collection just doesn't seem to work! *I'll probably be shot for saying that Regards, Brian Dela :-)
Agree totally with that. I've been programming Java for the last 6 months. While it's very easy to write and get complex functionality working quickly, it is just so sloooooow. Garbage collection is just a barely controlled memory leak.
-
Agree totally with that. I've been programming Java for the last 6 months. While it's very easy to write and get complex functionality working quickly, it is just so sloooooow. Garbage collection is just a barely controlled memory leak.
The whole idea of garbage collection is a good one.. if implemented properly but there is the inherent problem that for garbage collection to work properly it has to use up certain cpu time slices.... this can lead to not just the programming running slowly but slowing down the whole system on a process that never seems to work properly [well.. in Java's case]. You can do some pretty cool and complex stuff with Java and you can code it quickly but as regards execution speed.... X| Regards, Brian Dela :-)
-
jan larsen wrote: the obvious benefits of using Java Oh.. the fact that it can manage to turn a 2.4 GigHz Pentium 4 into the equivalent of a Commodore 64!! I've been using Java a lot here lately and while I do enjoy programming it* I find it just way too slow. Having two or 3 java apps [not my apps] running can kill my machine [2.4 P4,512MB Ram]. For example if I try to use eclipse and tomcat on this machine for any reasonable length of time [upwards of 6 hours] both apps are using over 100MB each after that length of time!!! It's ridiculous! And yes.. I've tried different VM's to see if it made a difference and it doesn't. The garbage collection just doesn't seem to work! *I'll probably be shot for saying that Regards, Brian Dela :-)
I think the GC works just fine, from Java 1.2 anyway, but there are certain pitfalls to avoid when writing for a garbage collected environment and I have seen some gross examples of that in C# too... First: GC does NOT mean resource handling, I used over a week on my last contract cleansweeping a C# application for unreleased db connections. The silly thing would leak up to a hundred connections pr. second! I wrote a Java server once running on a HP-UX box, and I never found out how long it could run without getting restarted, because the app had to be stopped every week due to problems with external modules. As for performance on that one: Our resident C programmer insisted that it HAD to be a C app, because he couldn't believe that speed otherwise. But then again, it wasn't a GUI app. "After all it's just text at the end of the day. - Colin Davies "For example, when a VB programmer comes to my house, they may say 'does your pool need cleaning, sir ?' " - Christian Graus
-
I think the GC works just fine, from Java 1.2 anyway, but there are certain pitfalls to avoid when writing for a garbage collected environment and I have seen some gross examples of that in C# too... First: GC does NOT mean resource handling, I used over a week on my last contract cleansweeping a C# application for unreleased db connections. The silly thing would leak up to a hundred connections pr. second! I wrote a Java server once running on a HP-UX box, and I never found out how long it could run without getting restarted, because the app had to be stopped every week due to problems with external modules. As for performance on that one: Our resident C programmer insisted that it HAD to be a C app, because he couldn't believe that speed otherwise. But then again, it wasn't a GUI app. "After all it's just text at the end of the day. - Colin Davies "For example, when a VB programmer comes to my house, they may say 'does your pool need cleaning, sir ?' " - Christian Graus
I'm not having trouble with any of my own applications... not big enough to ever be using 100MB... But eclipse, Tomcat... even the J2EE Application Deployer [Sun's own one] are ridiculous... really... When I used the J233 Application Deployer I had to more or less shut everything else down.. now if Sun can't get it right then, to me, it's all a bit messed up. jan larsen wrote: it wasn't a GUI app. Yep.. GUI seems to be a problem with Java*.. it still can run slowly with non-GUI apps [e.g. Tomcat] but a lot of non-GUI apps run fine. * Oh.. and Java GUI's look sh*te Regards, Brian Dela :-)
-
I'm not having trouble with any of my own applications... not big enough to ever be using 100MB... But eclipse, Tomcat... even the J2EE Application Deployer [Sun's own one] are ridiculous... really... When I used the J233 Application Deployer I had to more or less shut everything else down.. now if Sun can't get it right then, to me, it's all a bit messed up. jan larsen wrote: it wasn't a GUI app. Yep.. GUI seems to be a problem with Java*.. it still can run slowly with non-GUI apps [e.g. Tomcat] but a lot of non-GUI apps run fine. * Oh.. and Java GUI's look sh*te Regards, Brian Dela :-)
Brian Delahunty wrote: * Oh.. and Java GUI's look sh*te I usually use native look and feel, so I can't really see the difference. "After all it's just text at the end of the day. - Colin Davies "For example, when a VB programmer comes to my house, they may say 'does your pool need cleaning, sir ?' " - Christian Graus