ASP vs ASP.NET

[Laura K]

Re: ASP vs ASP.NET

I stand corrected


"Bob Barrows [MVP]" <reb01501@NOyah oo.SPAMcom> wrote in message
news:%23lAThS0z EHA.3468@TK2MSF TNGP14.phx.gbl. ..[color=blue]
> Laura K wrote:[color=green]
>> ASP is a scripting language with a
>> lot of limitations.[/color]
>
> No it isn't. It's a "platform" that supports the use of several scripting
> languages.
>[color=green]
>> ASP.NET is a full blown OOP.[/color]
>
> Again. It is not the language: it is a platform which supports several
> .Net languages, including VB.Net and C#
>
> I know this seems pedantic, but people need to understand the tools they
> are using.
>
> Bob Barrows
> --
> Microsoft MVP - ASP/ASP.NET
> Please reply to the newsgroup. This email account is my spam trap so I
> don't check it very often. If you must reply off-line, then remove the
> "NO SPAM"
>[/color]

[Laura K]

Re: ASP vs ASP.NET

I assume you are talking about using the datagrid.

If so how long would it take you to do pagination with the datalist or
repeat region.

I recently had a big time problem with pagination and the datalist.

Laura
"Paxton" <paxtonend@[no-spam]hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:DtPnd.2527 9$Y7.15650@fe1. news.blueyonder .co.uk...[color=blue]
>
> "WebMatrix" <WebMatrix@disc ussions.microso ft.com> wrote in message
> news:5861E74A-844F-4FDA-B171-E7B741FE880F@mi crosoft.com...[color=green]
>> Nathan,
>>[/color]
> <snip>[color=green]
>> If you were asked to develop a page that displays over thousands records,
>> users want to be able to page through records, say 20 rec per page, and
>> also
>> they want to be able to sort by columns asc/desc. How long would it take
>> you
>> to develop something like that in ASP? How many lines of code would it
>> take?
>> Well, in ASP.NET I could put together a page like that in 20-30 min
>> without a
>> lot of coding. Taking a coffee break in between.
>>[/color]
>
> It doesn't take me very much longer in classic ASP. It's called *code
> reuse*. Although the .NET datagrid control is very good.
>
> <musing>I wonder how many .NET sites have inappropriate calendars stuffed
> into them though........</musing>
>
> P
>[/color]

[WebMatrix]

Re: ASP vs ASP.NET

> It doesn't take me very much longer in classic ASP. It's called *code[color=blue]
> reuse*. Although the .NET datagrid control is very good.[/color]

"code reuse" in this case means copy/paste existing script into another ASP
file. And I bet it's a LOT OF "classic" spaghetti script + html. I am
talking about starting from scratch and having a few lines of code that are
easier to maintain.

[Cowboy (Gregory A. Beamer) - MVP]

RE: ASP vs ASP.NET

Overall, ASP uses a looping methodology, while ASP.NET uses a binding
methodology. Once you make the mental shift necessary to understand it, you
find it far more beautiful than ASP as you have a true separation of tags and
code (UI versus dynamic code by your vernacular).

The 3 guys article is likely to be an early article where the code was not
placed in CodeBehind. Thus, it looks messier. Once you learn to bind, it
comes down to the following example:

<% Do until objRS.EOF %>
<tr>
<td>
<%=objRS(0)%>
</td>
</tr>
<% Loop %>

etc.

versus

<asp:DataGrid id="DataGrid1" %>

In codeBehind

DataGrid1.DataS ource = objDataReader

The first example is far messier and more likely to get munged up by your
FrontPage artist than the second.

Just my two cents, but all of the "ASP is better" arguments I have seen rely
on bad examples in ASP.NET (moving ASP methodology into ASP.NET code world).

---

Gregory A. Beamer
MVP; MCP: +I, SE, SD, DBA

*************** ************
Think Outside the Box!
*************** ************

"Nathan Sokalski" wrote:
[color=blue]
> I was recently looking at a page about transitioning from ASP 3.0 to
> ASP.NET. (The page I was looking at is located at
> http://www.4guysfromrolla.com/webtech/041601-1.shtml ). It looks to me like
> they are taking away what has always seemed to me like the beauty of ASP. I
> always viewed the beauty of ASP as giving you the ability to fill in the
> dynamic areas without the need to change your HTML layout techniques. But
> ASP.NET seems to be trying to make you replace all HTML elements with
> ASP.NET code. For example, on the page I mentioned, notice how ASP.NET code
> is used to create the submit button even though the submit button does not
> have any dynamic areas. Also, when initially designing a page, I have always
> preferred to create it with HTML to make it look the way I want and then
> replace the dynamic areas with ASP. And just out of curiosity, for anyone
> who might know, will the "View Source" look the same? Because this is one of
> the primary tools to make sure the code is producing what I want, I need
> this to look the same as it would using ASP. Does anyone else have an
> opinion on whether ASP.NET is really better? Even though I have not yet
> learned much about coding in ASP.NET, what I have seen makes me lean towards
> ASP 3.0.
> --
> Nathan Sokalski
> njsokalski@hotm ail.com
> www.nathansokalski.com
>
>
>[/color]

[Peter Chong]

Re: ASP vs ASP.NET

When They do not have an clear answer or they want loosing folks for
asking question in fashion, MS just passing the buck to another like
redirect people to heck out of it, that is powerplay from Microsoft.
We just powerless and asking mercy from big corporation.
That's not a MS problem, Corporation problem.... ;-)

"Jim Carlock" <anonymous@127. 0.0.1> wrote in message news:<e#rso$szE HA.2936@TK2MSFT NGP10.phx.gbl>. ..[color=blue]
> I am NOT anti-microsoft.
>
> Just pointing out some things they can improve upon. They can
> improve things. I don't know how many endless redirection loops
> I ran into last week, but it was more than one. ;-)
>
> You know, that's where one redirection sends you to a page that
> sends you back to the initial page so your browser goes into an
> endless loop of GET GET GET GET GETting two different pages.
>
> --
> Jim Carlock
> Post replies to newsgroup.
>
> "Patrick.O. Ige" <patrickige@acn .waw.pl> wrote in message
> news:ea8rtCszEH A.1860@TK2MSFTN GP15.phx.gbl...
> Mr Jim Beam,
> Are u anti microsoft?
>
> "Jim Carlock" wrote:[color=green]
> > I'll give a counterpoint.
> >
> > 1) Take a look at the speed on Microsoft's own website.
> > 2) Take a look at the broken links, missing pages, and the
> > common mis-use of redirection.
> > 3) Microsoft ABUSES redirection.
> > 4) In all their abuse of redirection, they still have broken links.
> >
> > Realize these points...
> >
> > 1) Microsoft HAS the FASTEST computers in the world.
> > 2) Microsoft HAS the FASTEST networks in the world.
> > 3) Microsoft EMPLOYS the most SKILLED people in the world.
> > 4) Microsoft BUILT the webservers they use.
> > 5) There is NO EXCUSE at Microsoft (they have alot of problems).
> >
> > AND WITH everything they know, ask yourself if www.microsoft.com
> > runs as fast as it could. And if it doesn't run as fast as a webpage
> > should, what is the biggest limiting factor? Could the Microsoft
> > employees do a better job with php or coldfusion or even with
> > ASP.Net ?
> >
> > --
> > Jim Carlock
> > Post replies to newsgroup.
> >
> > "Nathan Sokalski" <njsokalski@hot mail.com> wrote in message
> > news:%23iMXC%23 pzEHA.1308@TK2M SFTNGP09.phx.gb l...
> > I was recently looking at a page about transitioning from ASP 3.0 to
> > ASP.NET. (The page I was looking at is located at
> > http://www.4guysfromrolla.com/webtech/041601-1.shtml ). It looks to me[/color]
> like[color=green]
> > they are taking away what has always seemed to me like the beauty of ASP.[/color]
> I[color=green]
> > always viewed the beauty of ASP as giving you the ability to fill in the
> > dynamic areas without the need to change your HTML layout techniques. But
> > ASP.NET seems to be trying to make you replace all HTML elements with
> > ASP.NET code. For example, on the page I mentioned, notice how ASP.NET[/color]
> code[color=green]
> > is used to create the submit button even though the submit button does not
> > have any dynamic areas. Also, when initially designing a page, I have[/color]
> always[color=green]
> > preferred to create it with HTML to make it look the way I want and then
> > replace the dynamic areas with ASP. And just out of curiosity, for anyone
> > who might know, will the "View Source" look the same? Because this is one[/color]
> of[color=green]
> > the primary tools to make sure the code is producing what I want, I need
> > this to look the same as it would using ASP. Does anyone else have an
> > opinion on whether ASP.NET is really better? Even though I have not yet
> > learned much about coding in ASP.NET, what I have seen makes me lean[/color]
> towards[color=green]
> > ASP 3.0.
> > --
> > Nathan Sokalski
> > njsokalski@hotm ail.com
> > www.nathansokalski.com
> >
> >
> >[/color][/color]

[Nathan Sokalski]

Re: ASP vs ASP.NET

You may be right, I think I'll just have to wait and see (since I have to
take a course on ASP.NET in the Spring anyway). But one small comment on
what you said. You said:

more likely to get munged up by your FrontPage artist

I hate to tell you, but anyone who uses FrontPage shouldn't even be thinking
about making fancy web pages, FrontPage will screw up your code so badly
that it's going to be trash from the beginning anyway!

But thank you for your input, I with think about comparing those two things
while I am learning ASP.NET. I think I am just having trouble comparing them
since I have never seen or written a full ASP.NET page, which probably makes
it hard for me to see how good it is. I might also be scared about needing
to redo my website, since it is primarily ASP.
--
Nathan Sokalski
njsokalski@hotm ail.com

https://www.nathansokalski.com

"Cowboy (Gregory A. Beamer) - MVP" <NoSpamMgbworld @comcast.netNoS pamM> wrote
in message news:7C85B428-6942-4BFD-B928-AE188D06C29D@mi crosoft.com...[color=blue]
> Overall, ASP uses a looping methodology, while ASP.NET uses a binding
> methodology. Once you make the mental shift necessary to understand it,
> you
> find it far more beautiful than ASP as you have a true separation of tags
> and
> code (UI versus dynamic code by your vernacular).
>
> The 3 guys article is likely to be an early article where the code was not
> placed in CodeBehind. Thus, it looks messier. Once you learn to bind, it
> comes down to the following example:
>
> <% Do until objRS.EOF %>
> <tr>
> <td>
> <%=objRS(0)%>
> </td>
> </tr>
> <% Loop %>
>
> etc.
>
> versus
>
> <asp:DataGrid id="DataGrid1" %>
>
> In codeBehind
>
> DataGrid1.DataS ource = objDataReader
>
> The first example is far messier and more likely to get munged up by your
> FrontPage artist than the second.
>
> Just my two cents, but all of the "ASP is better" arguments I have seen
> rely
> on bad examples in ASP.NET (moving ASP methodology into ASP.NET code
> world).
>
> ---
>
> Gregory A. Beamer
> MVP; MCP: +I, SE, SD, DBA
>
> *************** ************
> Think Outside the Box!
> *************** ************
>
> "Nathan Sokalski" wrote:
>[color=green]
>> I was recently looking at a page about transitioning from ASP 3.0 to
>> ASP.NET. (The page I was looking at is located at
>> http://www.4guysfromrolla.com/webtech/041601-1.shtml ). It looks to me
>> like
>> they are taking away what has always seemed to me like the beauty of ASP.
>> I
>> always viewed the beauty of ASP as giving you the ability to fill in the
>> dynamic areas without the need to change your HTML layout techniques. But
>> ASP.NET seems to be trying to make you replace all HTML elements with
>> ASP.NET code. For example, on the page I mentioned, notice how ASP.NET
>> code
>> is used to create the submit button even though the submit button does
>> not
>> have any dynamic areas. Also, when initially designing a page, I have
>> always
>> preferred to create it with HTML to make it look the way I want and then
>> replace the dynamic areas with ASP. And just out of curiosity, for anyone
>> who might know, will the "View Source" look the same? Because this is one
>> of
>> the primary tools to make sure the code is producing what I want, I need
>> this to look the same as it would using ASP. Does anyone else have an
>> opinion on whether ASP.NET is really better? Even though I have not yet
>> learned much about coding in ASP.NET, what I have seen makes me lean
>> towards
>> ASP 3.0.
>> --
>> Nathan Sokalski
>> njsokalski@hotm ail.com
>> www.nathansokalski.com
>>
>>
>>[/color][/color]

[Jeff Cochran]

Re: ASP vs ASP.NET

On Tue, 23 Nov 2004 01:06:48 -0500, "Nathan Sokalski"
<njsokalski@hot mail.com> wrote:
[color=blue]
>I hate to tell you, but anyone who uses FrontPage shouldn't even be thinking
>about making fancy web pages, FrontPage will screw up your code so badly
>that it's going to be trash from the beginning anyway![/color]

Don't use FrontPage much do you? Just because you don't doesn't mean
it has no purpose.
[color=blue]
> I might also be scared about needing
>to redo my website, since it is primarily ASP.[/color]

You don't need to "redo" an ASP site just because you started with
..NET coding. They can coexist fine.

Jeff

[Michael Geist]

RE: ASP vs ASP.NET

I am struggling with the same question but perhaps for different reasons. I
have been building web applications for about 7 years with (mostly) script
and some COM. I am comfortable with OOP and have taken several
Microsoft-designed ASP.NET courses including their ASP to ASP.NET course
(which in my opinion is a waste of time for anyone with more that a passing
familiarity with ASP) and the ASP.NET Bootcamp (more useful but still didn't
solve my problem). Not to sound discouraging, but I am not sure that
appreciating how and why ASP.NET works will resolve your dilema.
Most of my development is Intranet (IE 5.5+) based and, admittedly, I
frequently build funtionality with ASP that is more appropriate in COM or
ASP.NET but my issue is that I now have a great deal of reusable code
(infrastructure , if you will) and complex techniques that allow me to be VERY
productive with ASP. ASP.NET promises great reduction in development time
but for me it may mean months of a gnificantly longer development cycles
because I hardly know how to begin to create in .NET the pages and modules
that are second nature to me in classic.
Transitioning content and code from ASP to ASP.NET is one thing but does
anyone have suggestions for speeding the transition of skill and productivity?

Michael Geist
MCSD (6)


"Nathan Sokalski" wrote:
[color=blue]
> I was recently looking at a page about transitioning from ASP 3.0 to
> ASP.NET. (The page I was looking at is located at
> http://www.4guysfromrolla.com/webtech/041601-1.shtml ). It looks to me like
> they are taking away what has always seemed to me like the beauty of ASP. I
> always viewed the beauty of ASP as giving you the ability to fill in the
> dynamic areas without the need to change your HTML layout techniques. But
> ASP.NET seems to be trying to make you replace all HTML elements with
> ASP.NET code. For example, on the page I mentioned, notice how ASP.NET code
> is used to create the submit button even though the submit button does not
> have any dynamic areas. Also, when initially designing a page, I have always
> preferred to create it with HTML to make it look the way I want and then
> replace the dynamic areas with ASP. And just out of curiosity, for anyone
> who might know, will the "View Source" look the same? Because this is one of
> the primary tools to make sure the code is producing what I want, I need
> this to look the same as it would using ASP. Does anyone else have an
> opinion on whether ASP.NET is really better? Even though I have not yet
> learned much about coding in ASP.NET, what I have seen makes me lean towards
> ASP 3.0.
> --
> Nathan Sokalski
> njsokalski@hotm ail.com
> www.nathansokalski.com
>
>
>[/color]

[Kevin Spencer]

Re: ASP vs ASP.NET

Hi Michael,

Your complaint (if I understand it correctly) is similar to the type of
complaints that surrounded OOP in general when it was first introduced. It
takes awhile to build a good library of reusable classes. There are several
upsides to this. First, once you have a good library of classes, you can
work very quickly in designing new applications. Second, Microsoft has
already built quite a few for you (in the CLR).

The biggest advantages of OOP over procedural programming come into play
with larger applications that may be extended or changed over time. OOP is
much better-organized, and encapsulation is a huge benefit. It is much
harder to write the kind of spaghetti code I've had to deal with over the
years with ASP. It is much easier to organize your code, and maintain it.
Rather than having libraries of functions, which is almost no organization,
you have libraries of classes. Each class, if well-designed is nicely
encapsulated, and modular. the larger and more complex an application is,
the greater will be the benefit.

As for speeding the transition of skill and productivity, well, practice
makes perfect.

If you stick with it long enough, you'll never want to look back.

--
HTH,
Kevin Spencer
..Net Developer
Microsoft MVP
Neither a follower
nor a lender be.

"Michael Geist" <Michael Geist@discussio ns.microsoft.co m> wrote in message
news:4FF3FE78-0552-4B40-BF50-A8010DFF62CD@mi crosoft.com...[color=blue]
> I am struggling with the same question but perhaps for different reasons.[/color]
I[color=blue]
> have been building web applications for about 7 years with (mostly) script
> and some COM. I am comfortable with OOP and have taken several
> Microsoft-designed ASP.NET courses including their ASP to ASP.NET course
> (which in my opinion is a waste of time for anyone with more that a[/color]
passing[color=blue]
> familiarity with ASP) and the ASP.NET Bootcamp (more useful but still[/color]
didn't[color=blue]
> solve my problem). Not to sound discouraging, but I am not sure that
> appreciating how and why ASP.NET works will resolve your dilema.
> Most of my development is Intranet (IE 5.5+) based and, admittedly, I
> frequently build funtionality with ASP that is more appropriate in COM or
> ASP.NET but my issue is that I now have a great deal of reusable code
> (infrastructure , if you will) and complex techniques that allow me to be[/color]
VERY[color=blue]
> productive with ASP. ASP.NET promises great reduction in development time
> but for me it may mean months of a gnificantly longer development cycles
> because I hardly know how to begin to create in .NET the pages and modules
> that are second nature to me in classic.
> Transitioning content and code from ASP to ASP.NET is one thing but does
> anyone have suggestions for speeding the transition of skill and[/color]
productivity?[color=blue]
>
> Michael Geist
> MCSD (6)
>
>
> "Nathan Sokalski" wrote:
>[color=green]
> > I was recently looking at a page about transitioning from ASP 3.0 to
> > ASP.NET. (The page I was looking at is located at
> > http://www.4guysfromrolla.com/webtech/041601-1.shtml ). It looks to me[/color][/color]
like[color=blue][color=green]
> > they are taking away what has always seemed to me like the beauty of[/color][/color]
ASP. I[color=blue][color=green]
> > always viewed the beauty of ASP as giving you the ability to fill in the
> > dynamic areas without the need to change your HTML layout techniques.[/color][/color]
But[color=blue][color=green]
> > ASP.NET seems to be trying to make you replace all HTML elements with
> > ASP.NET code. For example, on the page I mentioned, notice how ASP.NET[/color][/color]
code[color=blue][color=green]
> > is used to create the submit button even though the submit button does[/color][/color]
not[color=blue][color=green]
> > have any dynamic areas. Also, when initially designing a page, I have[/color][/color]
always[color=blue][color=green]
> > preferred to create it with HTML to make it look the way I want and then
> > replace the dynamic areas with ASP. And just out of curiosity, for[/color][/color]
anyone[color=blue][color=green]
> > who might know, will the "View Source" look the same? Because this is[/color][/color]
one of[color=blue][color=green]
> > the primary tools to make sure the code is producing what I want, I need
> > this to look the same as it would using ASP. Does anyone else have an
> > opinion on whether ASP.NET is really better? Even though I have not yet
> > learned much about coding in ASP.NET, what I have seen makes me lean[/color][/color]
towards[color=blue][color=green]
> > ASP 3.0.
> > --
> > Nathan Sokalski
> > njsokalski@hotm ail.com
> > www.nathansokalski.com
> >
> >
> >[/color][/color]

[Jim Carlock]

Re: ASP vs ASP.NET

I knew this would come back to haunt me. :-)

I was searching microsoft.com. I've had quite a few problems
with XP over the last few weeks, not so much XP problems,
but Microsoft changed some things about Permissions with SP2
it seems. And I wanted to get IIS 5.1 working once again.

I agree most of the time you will get redirected to the proper
page but for some reason, that particular day I was redirected
to a new page, which in turn redirected me back to the original
redirecting page. And there was enough of a time lapse there
that it didn't crash Mozilla nor FireFox. Maybe Microsoft's
website is more oriented for Internet Explorer than it is for
Mozilla or FireFox. I wish I had kept a copy of the problematic
link.

As far as DEAD LINKS go, just open any MSDN article
from December 2001 issues of MSDN. These links sometimes
redirect and sometimes give a default DEAD LINK page. So
in effect what's happening is Microsoft has a DEFAULT DEAD
LINK page that is displayed and you don't get the 404 Page
Not Found message and in effect... there are no dead links.

I disagree though. There ARE dead links... I could list a thousand
if I wanted to spend all night copying and pasting... straight from
a 2001 issue of MSDN...

http://www.microsoft.com/workshop/author/htmlhelp/refov.asp

That particular link might have existed in 1998 or 1999. Time stands
still inside the articles they have written. Even though they break the
links, the articles STILL apply today just as they did in 1999, for
the most part.

Most of the tools I am working with are tools dated from 1998.
:-)

And I don't know what I was searching for but perhaps it was an
API name... InternetOpen or InternetConnect , because I was and
is having a problem with FTP through Internet Explorer and other
browsers and I'm getting a feeling that FTP through an application
is using InternetOpenURL . I was doing some searches for:
OnMouseOver and mouse_event as well... so no telling.

--
Jim Carlock
Post replies to newsgroup.

"Ray Costanzo [MVP]" <my first name at lane 34 dot commercial> wrote in
message news:uT$WdOtzEH A.2568@TK2MSFTN GP11.phx.gbl...
I'm not sure what microsoft.com site you're visiting, but I have to say that
I've always been quite impressed the how rare it is that I come across dead
links on a site that literally has millions of files...

Ray at home

"Jim Carlock" <anonymous@127. 0.0.1> wrote in message
news:OKHnQ%23qz EHA.2600@TK2MSF TNGP09.phx.gbl. ..[color=blue]
> I'll give a counterpoint.
>
> 1) Take a look at the speed on Microsoft's own website.
> 2) Take a look at the broken links, missing pages, and the
> common mis-use of redirection.
> 3) Microsoft ABUSES redirection.
> 4) In all their abuse of redirection, they still have broken links.
>
> Realize these points...
>
> 1) Microsoft HAS the FASTEST computers in the world.
> 2) Microsoft HAS the FASTEST networks in the world.
> 3) Microsoft EMPLOYS the most SKILLED people in the world.
> 4) Microsoft BUILT the webservers they use.
> 5) There is NO EXCUSE at Microsoft (they have alot of problems).[/color]

[QuentinJS]

Re: ASP vs ASP.NET

I found using libraries of functions made this a rather painless task with
little copy/paste required. Its how you build your basic infrastructure
thats important.

Cheers,
Quentin JS
[color=blue]
> "code reuse" in this case means copy/paste existing script into another ASP
> file. And I bet it's a LOT OF "classic" spaghetti script + html. I am
> talking about starting from scratch and having a few lines of code that are
> easier to maintain.[/color]

[Nathan Sokalski]

Re: ASP vs ASP.NET

You took the words right out of my mouth, I couldn't have said it better.
Maybe I stated my initial question unclearly, or maybe there's a lot of
biased responses, but I don't think anyone could have said my thoughts
better than you. Thanks.
--
Nathan Sokalski
njsokalski@hotm ail.com

https://www.nathansokalski.com

"Michael Geist" <Michael Geist@discussio ns.microsoft.co m> wrote in message
news:4FF3FE78-0552-4B40-BF50-A8010DFF62CD@mi crosoft.com...[color=blue]
>I am struggling with the same question but perhaps for different reasons.
>I
> have been building web applications for about 7 years with (mostly) script
> and some COM. I am comfortable with OOP and have taken several
> Microsoft-designed ASP.NET courses including their ASP to ASP.NET course
> (which in my opinion is a waste of time for anyone with more that a
> passing
> familiarity with ASP) and the ASP.NET Bootcamp (more useful but still
> didn't
> solve my problem). Not to sound discouraging, but I am not sure that
> appreciating how and why ASP.NET works will resolve your dilema.
> Most of my development is Intranet (IE 5.5+) based and, admittedly, I
> frequently build funtionality with ASP that is more appropriate in COM or
> ASP.NET but my issue is that I now have a great deal of reusable code
> (infrastructure , if you will) and complex techniques that allow me to be
> VERY
> productive with ASP. ASP.NET promises great reduction in development time
> but for me it may mean months of a gnificantly longer development cycles
> because I hardly know how to begin to create in .NET the pages and modules
> that are second nature to me in classic.
> Transitioning content and code from ASP to ASP.NET is one thing but does
> anyone have suggestions for speeding the transition of skill and
> productivity?
>
> Michael Geist
> MCSD (6)
>
>
> "Nathan Sokalski" wrote:
>[color=green]
>> I was recently looking at a page about transitioning from ASP 3.0 to
>> ASP.NET. (The page I was looking at is located at
>> http://www.4guysfromrolla.com/webtech/041601-1.shtml ). It looks to me
>> like
>> they are taking away what has always seemed to me like the beauty of ASP.
>> I
>> always viewed the beauty of ASP as giving you the ability to fill in the
>> dynamic areas without the need to change your HTML layout techniques. But
>> ASP.NET seems to be trying to make you replace all HTML elements with
>> ASP.NET code. For example, on the page I mentioned, notice how ASP.NET
>> code
>> is used to create the submit button even though the submit button does
>> not
>> have any dynamic areas. Also, when initially designing a page, I have
>> always
>> preferred to create it with HTML to make it look the way I want and then
>> replace the dynamic areas with ASP. And just out of curiosity, for anyone
>> who might know, will the "View Source" look the same? Because this is one
>> of
>> the primary tools to make sure the code is producing what I want, I need
>> this to look the same as it would using ASP. Does anyone else have an
>> opinion on whether ASP.NET is really better? Even though I have not yet
>> learned much about coding in ASP.NET, what I have seen makes me lean
>> towards
>> ASP 3.0.
>> --
>> Nathan Sokalski
>> njsokalski@hotm ail.com
>> www.nathansokalski.com
>>
>>
>>[/color][/color]

[Virgilio Jeresano Jr.]

RE: ASP vs ASP.NET

I don't think there's a quick way on building transition from ASP to ASP.NET
because the two works on a very different way. I heard at a .NET conference
that the easy way to learn ASP/VB.NET is to forget about what you know on
core ASP/VB. I think I agree on that because learning on "what you think you
already knew" gets really frustrating when you can't get things done "youre
own way before".

I have been also programming in PHP before and I had fun on "in-line"
scripting, etc. But when I worked on ASP.NET, they take away that fun, but
the cool thing was, I didn't find myself re-writing (or copy-pasting) my
codes again and again on different objects on the page and/or on different
pages... that advantage alone makes me don't wanna go back, not to metion
the separation of design and code (codebehind) and other bunch stuff that you
can do and really had fun learning them and still learning them up to this
moment.



"Michael Geist" wrote:
[color=blue]
> I am struggling with the same question but perhaps for different reasons. I
> have been building web applications for about 7 years with (mostly) script
> and some COM. I am comfortable with OOP and have taken several
> Microsoft-designed ASP.NET courses including their ASP to ASP.NET course
> (which in my opinion is a waste of time for anyone with more that a passing
> familiarity with ASP) and the ASP.NET Bootcamp (more useful but still didn't
> solve my problem). Not to sound discouraging, but I am not sure that
> appreciating how and why ASP.NET works will resolve your dilema.
> Most of my development is Intranet (IE 5.5+) based and, admittedly, I
> frequently build funtionality with ASP that is more appropriate in COM or
> ASP.NET but my issue is that I now have a great deal of reusable code
> (infrastructure , if you will) and complex techniques that allow me to be VERY
> productive with ASP. ASP.NET promises great reduction in development time
> but for me it may mean months of a gnificantly longer development cycles
> because I hardly know how to begin to create in .NET the pages and modules
> that are second nature to me in classic.
> Transitioning content and code from ASP to ASP.NET is one thing but does
> anyone have suggestions for speeding the transition of skill and productivity?
>
> Michael Geist
> MCSD (6)
>
>
> "Nathan Sokalski" wrote:
>[color=green]
> > I was recently looking at a page about transitioning from ASP 3.0 to
> > ASP.NET. (The page I was looking at is located at
> > http://www.4guysfromrolla.com/webtech/041601-1.shtml ). It looks to me like
> > they are taking away what has always seemed to me like the beauty of ASP. I
> > always viewed the beauty of ASP as giving you the ability to fill in the
> > dynamic areas without the need to change your HTML layout techniques. But
> > ASP.NET seems to be trying to make you replace all HTML elements with
> > ASP.NET code. For example, on the page I mentioned, notice how ASP.NET code
> > is used to create the submit button even though the submit button does not
> > have any dynamic areas. Also, when initially designing a page, I have always
> > preferred to create it with HTML to make it look the way I want and then
> > replace the dynamic areas with ASP. And just out of curiosity, for anyone
> > who might know, will the "View Source" look the same? Because this is one of
> > the primary tools to make sure the code is producing what I want, I need
> > this to look the same as it would using ASP. Does anyone else have an
> > opinion on whether ASP.NET is really better? Even though I have not yet
> > learned much about coding in ASP.NET, what I have seen makes me lean towards
> > ASP 3.0.
> > --
> > Nathan Sokalski
> > njsokalski@hotm ail.com
> > www.nathansokalski.com
> >
> >
> >[/color][/color]