The company plans to reset its tools to work with new products expected to ship in the coming months, including Windows.Net Server and an update to the SQL Server database. Stories at C|Net and eWeek.
Microsoft Retools Visual Studio.Net
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
Microsoft may have killed much of the innovative approach to Online services
However I suspect that ” Widows.Net ” is a typo
( feel free to remove this posting once you’ve seen it ELQ – BTW I like the more hardware&software-focused OSNews approach nowadays )
Further intergration of vs.net with SQL and Windows.net server is a very good thing.
VS.Net is already a great development product for Windows and the web.
Flame away about it being proprietary and all – it’s still a good product.
Unfortunately VS.Net uses the ASP.NET event-based model which is very unlike the web. When you choose a lower “schema” without Javascript then VS.NET is like any other language. It’s good when you’ve got a controlled environment of IE (intranets), but the gridlayout doesn’t work well in Mozilla or Opera (not sure whose fault it is here, but for a public web development you’ve got to assume there’s more of an audience than just IE). So it’s good, but you have to hold it back from being IE-only because by default it’ll choose a gridlayout with non-cross-platform dhtml validators and javascript form submission at every chance
That said, it’s nifty for Windows interfaces.
(oh, and “schema” because VS.NET schema enforces broaded rules than a w3 schema which is what most people think of when I say… schema)
Beta 1 of Everett will start beeing shipped in a month or so. I hope they had the time to put “Edit and continue”.
It’s true that the default settings in VS.NET (for ASP.NET) don’t work well with browsers other than IE. In fact, some of the settings don’t work well even on our Intranet with older versions of IE. (My boss has some kind of phobia of IE6.)
That said, it’s not rocket science simply not to use such things. A good example of a “live” site written in ASP.NET is
http://www.thewolfweb.com
I just fired up Mozilla on Mac OS X and it works great.
I’ve used a lot of web technologies, and of all of them I like ASP.NET the best. A large part of that is because of the .NET Framework upon which it was built, and because VS.NET rawks.
I’m a bit miffed with .Net at the moment, as we’ve just encountered a problem … Although .NET runs on NT4 )for desktop apps) you CANNOT deploy ASP.NET on NT4 ….
I would have noticed sooner if the documentation was a bit more obvious (why do you have to install IIS on NT4 if it won’t support AST.NET ?)
<sigh>
“I just fired up Mozilla on Mac OS X and it works great. ”
Works great, and being correct are two different things.
I’ve not touched VS.Net, so this may have changed, but it used to be that the html it would produce from server side controls was horrible.
Now show me VS.Net chucking out w3c standards html from all of its “helping”, then I will be impressed.
(Disclaimer, my stuff mostly doesn’t validate either, a process that is being corrected as we speak)
I have been using it for a while to create layout based pages and the htmls generated for Mozilla is horrible compared to IE, mainly when your page does have a good amount of server side controls (a database search page in my case)
To those that have yet to develop with ASP.NET , don’t take advice from these junior programmers above who don’t know how to use the product.
For one thing, ASP.NET detects the browser then uses client-side validation, DHTML trees, DHTML tabstrips, and more if possible. It can always fall back on non-DHTML functionality. Also, it translates tags into HTML3 equivalents if necessary.
“Also, it translates tags into HTML3 equivalents if necessary. ”
HTML3 ?
Welcome to 1997. Don’t me wrong. I think (VS|ASP).Net is a great thing, if your into it not being portable outside of the MS deathgrip ala PHP/Perl (but that’s another discussion entirely). But I have yet to see a WYSIWYG or code generator push out standards compliant HTML, with the exception of Dreamweaver.
To those that have yet to develop with ASP.NET , don’t take advice from these junior programmers above who don’t know how to use the product.
Oh for gosh sake. You don’t respond to any of the legitimate criticisms above and immediately reduce the conversation to petty insults. You should be ashamed.
It cannot always fall back on non-DHTML functionality as there are features (double-click, for example) that have no non-javascript equivalent. Now this is a branch from the usual nature of the web, it’s pushing it in a direction decided by Microsoft (by definition). It’s does a very good job in IE, it’s more bloated for Mozilla, and other browsers get poor results. For all browsers the auto-generated HTML is a bloated pigdog (I don’t blame them for this, auto-generated HTML such as WYSIWYG is always inflexible and flawed HTML).
So yeah, you can have the prior knowledge that double-clicks can’t be relied upon for the web, but you have a web where javascript and html and css are all required for use. That’s a break-away from the usual web, and that’s controlled by Microsoft who do a poor job in non-IE browsers.
Please, your post lacks, and you seem unable to respond with any detail.