Comment on ASP.NET MVC 3 Release CandidateparentComments−abrudtkuhl15yI know! They iterate pretty fast. I love it but it's hard to keep up−DougBTX15yIf you've not read it, a classic Joel article: Fire And Motion http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/fog0000000339.html−sk5t15yAn interesting article... applies very well to the LINQ2SQL / EMF / ADO.NET quagmire. Not so much to fairly mild iterations of MVC.−fiveo15yWhat about ASP.NET, ASP.NET 1.1, ASP.NET 2.0, ASP.NET AJAX, and now ASP.NET MVC + varieties of view engine?What about WinForms, WPF, Silverlight?−newt15yWinforms to WPF was about 20 years, and a sorely needed change.Silverlight is iterating quite quickly, but then they have WPF to build on.−fiveo15yI'm talking about WinForms .NET. .NET itself is not even 10 years old.−newt15yWhat's the difference? Winforms.Net is merely a thin wrapper of regular Winforms.
Comments
I know! They iterate pretty fast. I love it but it's hard to keep up
If you've not read it, a classic Joel article: Fire And Motion http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/fog0000000339.html
An interesting article... applies very well to the LINQ2SQL / EMF / ADO.NET quagmire. Not so much to fairly mild iterations of MVC.
What about ASP.NET, ASP.NET 1.1, ASP.NET 2.0, ASP.NET AJAX, and now ASP.NET MVC + varieties of view engine?
What about WinForms, WPF, Silverlight?
Winforms to WPF was about 20 years, and a sorely needed change.
Silverlight is iterating quite quickly, but then they have WPF to build on.
I'm talking about WinForms .NET. .NET itself is not even 10 years old.
What's the difference? Winforms.Net is merely a thin wrapper of regular Winforms.