Amazon.com Review
Microsoft’s .NET Framework for creating software applications holds tremendous promise, but it also introduces new challenges. Simply put, because .NET applications are distributed, pieces of them run on many separate computers and usually involve elaborate databases with many interlinked tables. Often, there are several human interfaces, at least one of which is served over a Web connection. When you’re building such elaborate systems, you need specialists. Which me… More >>
Microsoft Visual Studio .NET Enterprise Architect
Related Products:
All .NET languages need interpretor. Even C.NET which is a shame. Such language as C usually used to develop apps closely interacting with OS. So there will be even less interaction between user created apps and system because now Microsoft tells us to do everything through interpreter. Just like crippled Java does! But difference between stuff written in Java and C is that you know what your C application does, but you can never be sure about your Java application because there is interpreter between you and system, another buggy layer that controls you and that you cannot control. I agree .NET might be convinient way for people who like everything easy or are afraid to explore, but The biggest flow is that it takes control out of your hands convincing you that you are in control.
Usual Microsofts trick!
Rating: 2 / 5
In my opinion it really depends on the programmer’s background. For aspiring programmers, I would say Visual Basic 6 is much easier to learn. VB.NET is now fully object oriented, and this adds its own bit of complexity. I come from a Visual Basic background, starting with version 4. When I moved on to VB.NET I had a decent grasp on Object Oriented design and development, however I still had some learning curve there when it came to applying OOP to the VB syntax. In the long run, object oriented VB is worth the learning curve. It makes VB a much more powerful and flexible language. It was rewritten from scratch by the way (in C#). For developers with a C++Java background, C# is the way to go. The learning curve should be negligible. As a matter of fact, I honestly can’t tell the difference between C# and Java code when just glancing at it.
When we were deciding on which languageplatform to use for this project, we had quite a bit of debate on the learning curve for us versus the value added. The choices were VB 6 and .NET. We were concerned that the move for most of us from VB6 to an OOP language might be too much, resulting in a great loss in development time. Fortunately we realized that while there will be some pain in the beginning, in the long run we will save time by using a single class library and inheriting common functionality rather than rewriting it every time, which happens a lot in VB 6. There are some ways of doing this in VB 6, but they aren’t considered best practices.
>
This is a toughie because there are so many languages and platforms out there. Typically folks will be moving from a Microsoft platform, probably utilizing COM. We pretty much .NET-enabled Microsoft Commerce Server 2000 without a hitch (COM based). It was really as simple as duplicating the methods in the objects we needed as web services methods, adding a reference to the COM object (.NET generates a wrapper for you), and calling the COM classes within the web service. The really cool thing about this is that now we can add things to a shopping cart from any client, anywhere. Normally CS2K API can only be utilized on the web server which it is installed. Otherwise you have to get into the messy DCOM. I would envision an ASP setting this kind of architecture up and selling shopping cart services.
So in short, COM based apps would seem the easiest to migrate to .NET environment. ASP web apps should be fairly easy to migrate. Microsoft has done a great job keeping ASP.NET as backward compatible as possible.
>
ASP.NET is much, much faster than traditional ASP. The main reason for this is ASP.NET pages are compiled the first time they’re accessed, then cached for subsequent access. ASP on the other hand is intepreted script. Further, ASP.NET uses VB.NET or C# as its back end logic, instead of the measily VBScript ASP uses.
…
Rating: 3 / 5
The most “programming” I’ve ever done was a bit of server-side JavaScript – but with the IDE and the online help, I’ve had no problem sitting down and just chugging away at C#. The problem someone noted about needing an interpreter is incorrect: the Native Code Compiler included with the .NET SDK (installed with VS or available separately) can compile Microsoft’s IL into machine code for Windows.
Definitely worth the learning curve if this is your thing!
Rating: 5 / 5
Great, functional IDE for true object-oriented development.
However, the UML support is held together by glue and scotch tape with the included version of Visio 2002. Very poorly done, tedious and will not let you perform continuous round-trip engineering.
For an outstanding UML/Editor solution, check out Together Control Center. Although written and focused towards Java, it is capable of modeling and generating C# and VB.NET code.
Rating: 4 / 5
Most of you reading this review will have used a Microsoft Compiler before, or a Borland product. If you have yet to experience .NET, you are missing out big time.
Interface (2 sections):
First Impressions 8/10 – I started up Visual Studio .NET only to see everything… EVERYTHING has been changed in some way. The reason why this gets an 8 is because it does not do well with new people coming to this product. But once you learn the interface and can get used to it:
Current Impressiosn 10/10 – You will find that it is much more productive interface than Visual Studio 6. Now if your coming from Borland products, you will find that C# and VB is great, and can compete directly with Borland.
Usefullness: 9/10 – It is just amazing how much you can do with this program, although it does have a few drawbacks, UML for example, but this can be overlooked.
Value: 8/10 – If you can afford it, but the reason I gave it an 8, is because it is expensive, and most people will not be able to afford this product, but those that are able to do so, should. Maybe in a few years, this will replace VS 6 in price
Final Score 9/10 – If you use C++, Visual Basic, or even the great C# that has just come out, you will love this product. The optimization is great.
Final Words: Buy it, if not this, at least Visual Studio 6, but VS .NET wins the battle of the two!
Rating: 5 / 5