ASP vs ASP.NET

Discussion in 'ASP General' started by Nathan Sokalski, Nov 20, 2004.

  1. 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

    www.nathansokalski.com
     
    Nathan Sokalski, Nov 20, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Nathan Sokalski

    clintonG Guest

    Then you have more to learn. Lots more.

    --
    <%= Clinton Gallagher, "Twice the Results -- Half the Cost"
    Architectural & e-Business Consulting -- Software Development
    NET
    URL http://www.metromilwaukee.com/clintongallagher/



    "Nathan Sokalski" <> wrote in message
    news:%23iMXC%...
    > 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
    >
    > www.nathansokalski.com
    >
    >
     
    clintonG, Nov 20, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Nathan Sokalski wrote:
    > 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.


    Once you get used to ASP.NET conventions, you will never look back. You
    do not HAVE to make a submit button as an ASP.NET web control, however,
    you have access to additional features and benefits if you do (like
    viewstate and easier event scripting).

    > 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.


    View source should look pretty much the same, since it's all client
    side. ASP.NET adds some special things (and sometimes makes the
    client-side code look ugly), but it's worth it. I used to be a PHP/ASP
    programmer. Learning ASP.NET was like pulling teeth. But once I got
    used to it I wouldn't program any other way. I appreciate the advanced
    features of ASP.NET and the .NET framework.

    Just keep trying,
    Daniel
    http://www.danhendricks.com
     
    Daniel M. Hendricks, Nov 20, 2004
    #3
  4. Nathan Sokalski

    Jim Carlock Guest

    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" <> wrote in message
    news:%23iMXC%...
    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

    www.nathansokalski.com
     
    Jim Carlock, Nov 20, 2004
    #4
  5. Nathan Sokalski

    Ted Dawson Guest

    I haven't the foggiest idea of what the **** you are trying to say. Please
    dumb it down a bit for us ASP/VBScript folks.




    "Jim Carlock" <anonymous@127.0.0.1> wrote in message
    news:OKHnQ%...
    > 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" <> wrote in message
    > news:%23iMXC%...
    > 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
    >
    > www.nathansokalski.com
    >
    >
    >
     
    Ted Dawson, Nov 20, 2004
    #5
  6. Mr Jim Beam,
    Are u anti microsoft?

    "Jim Carlock" <anonymous@127.0.0.1> wrote in message
    news:OKHnQ#...
    > 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" <> wrote in message
    > news:%23iMXC%...
    > 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
    >
    > www.nathansokalski.com
    >
    >
    >
     
    Patrick.O.Ige, Nov 20, 2004
    #6
  7. I am not agreeing or disagreeing with anything you said about Microsoft,
    because that has almost nothing to do with my question. My question was
    asking what other people's opinions were as to their preferences and
    advantages/disadvantages between ASP and ASP.NET were. I will let you know,
    however, that I think Microsoft's website is one of the most poorly designed
    sites I have ever seen, and many of my friends agree. Maybe if we get lucky
    they will improve it if they ever decide to convert it to XML, since they
    have been doing a lot of work on XML technologies (although I'm not going to
    get my hopes up!).
    --
    Nathan Sokalski

    www.nathansokalski.com

    "Jim Carlock" <anonymous@127.0.0.1> wrote in message
    news:OKHnQ%...
    > 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" <> wrote in message
    > news:%23iMXC%...
    > 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
    >
    > www.nathansokalski.com
    >
    >
    >
     
    Nathan Sokalski, Nov 20, 2004
    #7
  8. Nathan Sokalski

    Jim Carlock Guest

    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" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    Mr Jim Beam,
    Are u anti microsoft?

    "Jim Carlock" wrote:
    > 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" <> wrote in message
    > news:%23iMXC%...
    > 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
    >
    > www.nathansokalski.com
    >
    >
    >
     
    Jim Carlock, Nov 20, 2004
    #8
  9. 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%...
    > 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).
     
    Ray Costanzo [MVP], Nov 20, 2004
    #9
  10. Do you even understand the words that are coming out of your mouth?

    Sheesh...

    Convert a Web site/page to XML...

    +++ Rick ---

    --

    Rick Strahl
    West Wind Technologies
    http://www.west-wind.com/
    http://www.west-wind.com/weblog/
    http://www.west-wind.com/wwThreads/
    ----------------------------------
    Making waves on the Web


    "Nathan Sokalski" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > I am not agreeing or disagreeing with anything you said about Microsoft,
    > because that has almost nothing to do with my question. My question was
    > asking what other people's opinions were as to their preferences and
    > advantages/disadvantages between ASP and ASP.NET were. I will let you

    know,
    > however, that I think Microsoft's website is one of the most poorly

    designed
    > sites I have ever seen, and many of my friends agree. Maybe if we get

    lucky
    > they will improve it if they ever decide to convert it to XML, since they
    > have been doing a lot of work on XML technologies (although I'm not going

    to
    > get my hopes up!).
    > --
    > Nathan Sokalski
    >
    > www.nathansokalski.com
    >
    > "Jim Carlock" <anonymous@127.0.0.1> wrote in message
    > news:OKHnQ%...
    > > 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" <> wrote in message
    > > news:%23iMXC%...
    > > 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
    > >
    > > www.nathansokalski.com
    > >
    > >
    > >

    >
    >
     
    Rick Strahl [MVP], Nov 20, 2004
    #10
  11. Nathan Sokalski

    WebMatrix Guest

    Nathan,

    I think before reading that article, you should read up more on the basic
    concepts of web / browsers technology.
    Why would you expect to see anything other than standart HTML if you "view
    source". It doesn't matter what generated that page ASP, ASP.NET, PHP,
    ColdFusion whatever, browser can only understand HTML. And why would it
    matter if MS would 'convert' their site to XML, they might be running XML on
    the back-end anyway for all we know, but again at some point it has to be
    converted to HTML, that's all that browsers can understand.
    As far as your ASP vs. ASP.NET concerns... again all ASP.NET elements either
    server control tags or server control objects in the code will be rendered as
    HTML eventually. You can still have static HTML in your page, just embed
    server side controls where dynamic elements should go. But the advantages of
    that are enormous; you have so much programming control over a web page and
    its elements.
    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.

    "Nathan Sokalski" wrote:

    > I am not agreeing or disagreeing with anything you said about Microsoft,
    > because that has almost nothing to do with my question. My question was
    > asking what other people's opinions were as to their preferences and
    > advantages/disadvantages between ASP and ASP.NET were. I will let you know,
    > however, that I think Microsoft's website is one of the most poorly designed
    > sites I have ever seen, and many of my friends agree. Maybe if we get lucky
    > they will improve it if they ever decide to convert it to XML, since they
    > have been doing a lot of work on XML technologies (although I'm not going to
    > get my hopes up!).
    > --
    > Nathan Sokalski
    >
    > www.nathansokalski.com
    >
    > "Jim Carlock" <anonymous@127.0.0.1> wrote in message
    > news:OKHnQ%...
    > > 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" <> wrote in message
    > > news:%23iMXC%...
    > > 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
    > >
    > > www.nathansokalski.com
    > >
    > >
    > >

    >
    >
    >
     
    WebMatrix, Nov 20, 2004
    #11
  12. Nathan Sokalski

    Laura K Guest

    To clarify why in asp.net you are replacing HTML with ASP controls there is
    a simple answer. HTML code is client side. That means you are at the mercy
    of the browser. Different browsers render different pieces of code
    differently and you can not control the output without complicated code that
    detects the different browsers and renders you page appropriately.

    With asp.net the same objects like textboxes, drop downs etc are created on
    the server side. This means it does not matter what browser you are using
    they will look like you want them. Also with asp.net you have more control
    over how the controls will look. For example background colors, sizes etc.
    Of course I believe CSS is a better option for these things.

    As for other features of ASP vs. ASP.net, comparing the two are like
    comparing the sprout to the jolly green giant (sorry it was the only example
    to come into my head). ASP is a scripting language with a lot of
    limitations. ASP.NET is a full blown OOP. You have an incredible amount of
    options already provided for you that you would otherwise have to hand code
    in ASP 3.0. ASP.NET provides controls that you can grab and use.
    Unfortunately there are so many different options in ASP.NET it is sometimes
    impossible to know what is available. So keep asking on message boards.

    Now I am still learning all I can about ASP and it has been tough. I have
    so far taken two graduate level courses in VB.NET and I am still suffering
    but I believe it will be worth it. I think a major thing about moving over
    to ASP.NET is it takes more hard core programming skill while almost anyone
    can get by in asp.

    One last thing. I can not remember where on the Microsoft site I saw this
    but asp 3.0 will no longer be supported within a few years. Why create a
    website that you know will be obsolete soon when you can create something
    state of the art instead.

    Laura K




    "Nathan Sokalski" <> wrote in message
    news:%23iMXC%...
    >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
    >
    > www.nathansokalski.com
    >
     
    Laura K, Nov 20, 2004
    #12
  13. Laura K wrote:
    > ASP is a scripting language with a
    > lot of limitations.


    No it isn't. It's a "platform" that supports the use of several scripting
    languages.

    > ASP.NET is a full blown OOP.


    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"
     
    Bob Barrows [MVP], Nov 20, 2004
    #13
  14. >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


    Have you ever done grids on ASP 3.0 (without buying 3th party controls) or
    filtering or templates or powerfull SOAP or interop with Windows API's? With
    classic ASP, it's a mess and very difficult, more, if you use custom
    components (say a component that does HTTP GET), you have a high risk of
    leaks and hangs. That is easy with ASP.NET (Grids and full power API's
    behind it). I've never had to reset ASP.NET because of 'hanging code'.

    > 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


    If you get used to the power of ASP.NET you'll discover that you can use
    classic programming as with asp 3.0 and modern OOP oriented programming.
    Sometimes you really need to insert static HTML in your code, and then a
    LiteralControl or simply response.write will do.

    > 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


    yes, nothing in ASP.NET is worse than ASP 3.0. Just get used to powerfull
    programming in ASP.NET and you can reach anything you want as with asp 3.0
    and even much more.

    > learned much about coding in ASP.NET, what I have seen makes me lean
    > towards ASP 3.0.
    > --
    > Nathan Sokalski
    >
    > www.nathansokalski.com
    >
     
    Egbert Nierop \(MVP for IIS\), Nov 20, 2004
    #14
  15. Nathan Sokalski

    Paxton Guest

    "WebMatrix" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Nathan,
    >

    <snip>
    > 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.
    >


    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
     
    Paxton, Nov 20, 2004
    #15
  16. Nathan Sokalski

    Laura K Guest

    I stand corrected


    "Bob Barrows [MVP]" <> wrote in message
    news:%...
    > Laura K wrote:
    >> ASP is a scripting language with a
    >> lot of limitations.

    >
    > No it isn't. It's a "platform" that supports the use of several scripting
    > languages.
    >
    >> ASP.NET is a full blown OOP.

    >
    > 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"
    >
     
    Laura K, Nov 21, 2004
    #16
  17. Nathan Sokalski

    Laura K Guest

    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.25279$...
    >
    > "WebMatrix" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> Nathan,
    >>

    > <snip>
    >> 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.
    >>

    >
    > 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
    >
     
    Laura K, Nov 21, 2004
    #17
  18. Nathan Sokalski

    WebMatrix Guest

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


    "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.
     
    WebMatrix, Nov 21, 2004
    #18
  19. 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.DataSource = 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:

    > 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
    >
    > www.nathansokalski.com
    >
    >
    >
     
    Cowboy (Gregory A. Beamer) - MVP, Nov 22, 2004
    #19
  20. Nathan Sokalski

    Peter Chong Guest

    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$>...
    > 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" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > Mr Jim Beam,
    > Are u anti microsoft?
    >
    > "Jim Carlock" wrote:
    > > 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" <> wrote in message
    > > news:%23iMXC%...
    > > 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
    > >
    > > www.nathansokalski.com
    > >
    > >
    > >
     
    Peter Chong, Nov 22, 2004
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Andy Elmhorst
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    500
    Bassel Tabbara [MSFT]
    Jul 8, 2003
  2. dave
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,284
  3. Ben
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    1,165
  4. Andrea Raimondi
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    489
  5. Amelyan
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    166
    Amelyan
    Apr 25, 2005
Loading...

Share This Page