Thank you for your input.
>Hi Mike
>
>>I haven't been in development very long and I haven't done a lot outside of .NET. Do you attribute the poor design and architecture to people learning the .NET way to do things?
>
>This kind of implies that there are a lot of .NET disasters and I don't believe that is the case over and above any other development platform. It's a bit like with Fox/VFP. In the hands of less capable developers, you could always cobble together something that worked. That was both a strength and a weakness. I guess if you are a Fox developer and you try and use .NET in the same way as you used Fox, then you are going to have problems. .NET/C# isn't a million miles away from Java so, I don't think that there is some outstanding .NET way of doing things. It's just OOP based development with perhaps more emphasis on the framework than the languages. However, this is not new. But, with languages like Fox, the language has become bloated and possible somewhat contradictory over the years because many features have been added to the language as opposed to libraries that are accessible to the underlying language, as might be the case in .NET.
>
>>Is the .NET way to do things really that different than other ways?
>
>Not in my opinion.
>
>>I understand the disconnected data is a newer concept (I think), but to me it seem if a developer uses fairly trivial OO principles then they can have a very manageable architecture.
>
>I don't think that disconnected data is a newer concept. Its hardly any different to using VFP against a SQL server back-end and pulling the data back from SQL server into client side cursors whether as a result of SPT, Views or CursorAdapters.
>
>>I didn't realize that this was the case. Are you talking about opening the 1.1 code in VS 2008 and having it convert it to 3.5? I know you can open projects in 2008 and target the 2.0 framework.
>
>There isn't any "conversion" per-se, apart from possible Solution and Project file structures. However, the code will be handled as-is. There are also side by side CLR options where different version of the CLR can be targeted.
>
>HTH
