ASP vs ASP.NET

[James Baker]

Learn C#, get a new hosting company and upgrade your site. Might require a
slight extension to your deadline, but that's the approach I would take =).

 

[James Baker]

While I see your point, these are all incidental. Relative to the larger
argument of "which is better?" they don't really hold any weight, because
the situation could easily be reversed and holds no criticisms of either
platform.

Long story short, read up on the options and choose the platform based on
your needs ;-).

 

[Aaron [SQL Server MVP]]

Or, the company is not willing to outfit the entire development team with
a

new version of Visual Studio.NET.

Yes, you can code C# in notepad, but I don't think you'd want to. And
admittedly you could use that web matrix tool, but often that is
"unsupported 3rd party software," depending on the gestapo-ness of your IT
department.

 

[Aaron [SQL Server MVP]]

While I see your point, these are all incidental. Relative to the larger

argument of "which is better?" they don't really hold any weight, because
the situation could easily be reversed and holds no criticisms of either
platform.

Once again, I am in no way stating that any of these points means that ASP
is better or ASP.Net is better. As I have stated previously, this is a
subjective call, just like which car I should buy is different than which
car you should buy.

My points were in response to the statement, "There is no good reason to use
ASP rather than ASP.NET", nothing about which is better, just about
individual benefits of one over the other, and that there are scenarios
where some of these points ARE more important than the whole "which is
better" religious argument.

A

 

[Jeff Cochran]

Learn C#, get a new hosting company and upgrade your site. Might require a
slight extension to your deadline, but that's the approach I would take =).

Which may be possible and work for you. It may not for others.

The original question was "Why use one over the other?" The answer is
always (or *should* always be) "Because that particular technology
fits the needs of the organization best."

Jeff

 

[Zenobia]

Learn C#, get a new hosting company and upgrade your site. Might require a
slight extension to your deadline, but that's the approach I would take =).

I agree with you. If the app is already written in ASP or only
small or simple then use ASP. But if you refer to the root of
this thread; message-ID: <[email protected]>,
I don't, necessarily think you'll find that's the case. I would
write a new, large or complex site in ASP.NET, even if I had to
learn it from scratch to do so. The guy who has to maintain it
may not thank me but so long as he doesn't curse having to
maintain more ASP that will be thanks enough; and that guy may
very well be the author.

 

[mikael]

I'd stick with asp for a while, but that's mostly becasue the company
that I work for made it a helluva lot more useful for me recently.
(http://www.naltabyte.com)
I need javascript for the clientside of things to make it
browser-independent, and I prefer to work with the same language on the
server (JScript), and if possible also the same logic, using the DOM.
- Using the same frame of mind all around suits me better.
Events, using ID's to find page-elements, etc, basic dhtml-concepts, are
all available more easily in asp.
Not in itself, but with some real minor tweaking, and this is what the
above mentioned company does, and it's so easy to do that I need to ask
myself why I should move to asp.Net, which is harder to redefine to suit
my individual needs, regardless any tweakings of any sort.


Live long and prosper(^-^)y

*** Sent via Devdex http://www.devdex.com ***
Don't just participate in USENET...get rewarded for it!

 

[shalafi]

Dont think anyone would argue with that.

But given the original question and that it was posted in the aspnet
newsgroup i wouldnt go out and beat someone up for assuming it does fit the
business need. I currently work on asp.net on my personal time, at work i
support webclasses because "that fits their needs". As a matter of fact
cobol and fortran would fit their needs if i get it to spit out what they
are after. Doesnt mean it's a good way of doing things.

Do what fits the company needs, but if your in a position like me where all
those above you have never seen the technical side of things it's kind of a
responsibility to try and drive change. Webclasses work now, in 2008
support for VB ends, and the overhead of dealing with the app as it is
designed (not totally due to webclasses themselves) is very costly on my
time and their budget. Without my attempt to drive change, they will never
know this nor know alternatives and the cost/benifit with them.

 

[Jeff Cochran]

Dont think anyone would argue with that.

But given the original question and that it was posted in the aspnet
newsgroup i wouldnt go out and beat someone up for assuming it does fit the
business need.

Except it was posted in *both* groups...

Jeff

 

[Zenobia]

Except it was posted in *both* groups...

Jeff

The thread started in the ASP group only. I cross-posted my
reply to the root post in the ASP.NET group.

 

[shalafi]

Sorry, i didnt see that. reguardless.

Business needs are important. But IMHO if i see a business need leading
into a roadblock i feel the need to speak out and let those who actually
make the "business needs" see the light at the end of the tunnel or the wall
at the end of the tunnel.

Might not be true for others, but at least where i am they like to tie
business needs and implementation togeather.

Example: Using webclasses is a specific requirement within the project i'm
working for now. Any server which can run webclasses can run classic asp,
and classic asp could accomplish all other requirements. While classic asp
is just as supported as webclasses (not much), it's more popular and
solutions to some issues are easier to find. classic asp also avoids dll
registration problems and easier to automate replication and deployment.
classic asp is also easier to port in the future to asp.net.

if they specify that the application should be capable of being easily
ported to both unix/apache and iis, or capable of running on iis4/nt4 then
that would be a much more valid "business need" that i wouldnt argue with.
Just because it doesnt tie implementation and needs togeather.