Re: God I Love Delphi7

From: David Farrell-Garcia (davidf_at_orcasoftware.com)
Date: 12/17/04 

Date: 17 Dec 2004 09:55:56 -0800

Peds wrote:

> Yes, for server-side development, ASP.Net (web services, etc)
> ADO.Net, etc.

That is a fallacy. Windows Forms are extremely easy to use. What
stumbling blocks have you seen to WinForms?

 I had no show stopping problems in D8 and none so far
> D2005. Client-side, I'm not impressed. Not that I've any
> show-stopping problems, but I can do it easier and faster in D6.

I have had no showstopping issues in .NET either. It is not really a
question of which is easier. Delphi has always been easy. What is
relevant is that .Net development is very easy. It gets a big nod for
deployment and versioning issues. End users should find that
applications just work.

>
> >It is extremely easy to develop
> > and deploy. Versioning problems are non-existent,
>
> Hmm, distributing 1 Win32 executable vs 1 executable and who know how
> many other required assemblies. Where do you put those assemblies on
> a client's machine? Same directory as the app? System directory?

Maybe you should do a little research. Normally your application is
self contained with everthing in your application directory. Even your
application config files shoule be placed in your app directory. Only
globally shared assemblies are placed in the GAC. Unlike Win32
programs which usually have stuff spread out everywhere including tons
of registry entries.

> What if you have multiple apps requiring those assemblies? I know
> about the GAC, but a secretary 300 miles away is going to tell her
> boss I spit at her on the phone because my app doesn't work ("Oh, we
> to go into the GAC and load <click>...Hello?...Hello?").

I assume that you use an install program to install your clients
software. If you have an assembly that needs to be shared then put it
in the GAC. Duh! Don't you do the same thing now when you put a .dll
in Windows/System32 folder? You can also just keep the app self
contained by putting all related assemblies right in the app directory.
Who cares if you have several copies. I doubt that your assembly would
eat up much disk space. It is your choice.

> What happens when .NET 2.0 comes out, you develop some killer app and
> your client refuses to upgrade?

I guess the same thing you do now. You can support the older version of
Windows or the new one or both. your choice. The advantage to .Net is
that you can have them all on the same machine and it is transparent to
the end-user. I have .Net 1.0, 1.1 and 2.0 beta all running on my
machine and have not had ONE SINGLE PROBLEM running any applications
targeted for any of those frameworks. I think you might consider
giving MS some credit for finally doing something right.

All he knows is the app doesn't
> work, but your competitor's Win32 app does. There aren't any version
> problems yet because it's still 1.1 and not a gazillion 3rd party
> assemblies over-writing each other yet. Ability to distribute 1
> executable solves all kinds of problems.

You simply do not have a clear understanding of how it works. You can
have different .Net frameworks running on the same machine. They are
just not used until called up by an application. You can even have
different versions of your applicaion in the same directory and it will
know what version of an assembly to use and what framework it needs.

>
> > the framework is free
> > and already built into all major installers, ADO.NET is a HUUUUUGE
> > improvement over ADO.
>
> ADO.NET is better in some ways, but is no where near the maturity of
> ADO (from a Delphi perspective).

What does Delphi have to do with it? ADO.Net is part of the framework,
not Delphi? Exactly what part of ADO.NET can you not access with
Delphi?

> What is RAD about writing code to
> keep data controls in sync with the data (not a lot of code, but I'd
> prefer to do it at design time)? From the server side (ASP.Net),
> ADO.Net is better than sliced bread. Too many good things to say
> about Borland's implementation (yes in D8 and so far D2005)

.Net is a framework. It is up to a tool vendor to make it more RAD.
Delphi has always been RAD and Boland has done some work to add some
visualization to ADO.NET development but Microsoft has also gone that
directrion with VS 2005.

Don't give up on .NET or you will be left out in the cold in a few
short years. 

-- 
David Farrell-Garcia
Whidbey Island Software LLC
Posted with XanaNews 1.16.5.2

Relevant Pages

  • Re: How does an .NET know which version of framework to use
    ... it is stored in the assembly's manifest. ... Assemblies made with VS.NET 2002 automatically point to the 1.0 Framework as ... When I develope an App using VS.NET 2002 it uses framework 1.0. ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.clr)
  • Re: .net framework version, visual studio 03
    ... i have once tested a 1.1 app on a 2.0 framework (clean pc with only framework 2.0 installed) and to my own surprise it worked without anny noticable problems. ... VS.NET 2003 will create .NET 1.1 assemblies and cannot be altered to create .NET 2.0 assemblies. ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.languages.vb)
  • Re: VStudio 2002 using wrong version of .Net
    ... but you can certainly make it reference v1.1 assemblies. ... you can use a config file to make your app run under the v1.1 ... v1.1 of the framework. ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.setup)
  • Re: IE Hosts Windows Control
    ... statement in the "What's new in the .NET Framework 1.1" ... Internet-based Web page or Windows Forms assemblies ... could get my control to execute on a framework v1 sp1 ... >> assemblyName, String ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.security)
  • Re: Goodbye and Best Wishes
    ... an N+1 capable framework, you can't even display a nice dialog box to ... > "When you choose to take advantage of features available in a newer ... with some assemblies coming from version n and some ... of an assembly compiled with an N+1 compiler to use an N framework, ...
    (borland.public.delphi.non-technical)