Reasons To Migrate to 2.0

[Jeffrey Todd]

I have a heavy investment in an ASP.NET Web application built on 1.1. I have
read about a bunch of new features coming in ASP.NET 2.0, and I don't see
that I need the *new* features. So, what would be some good reasons for me
to switch to 2.0 if I don't need its new features. Are existing features
enhansed? Is overall performance improved substantially? What would be some
top benefits to migrate to 2.0 for someone who doesn't need the new
features? By "new features" I mean [things available in 2.0 that simply
aren't there in 1.1] - like master pages.

Thanks!

 

[Bruce Barker]

won't really know until 2.0 is released later this year (probably fall). it
currently has compatibility problems with 1.1 code.

if your site will run under 2.0 with little modification, then you can look
at benefits only. if you need a large conversion effort to get to 2.0, then
the decision is harder.

also you need to look at improvements in vs2005, these may be worth more
than the 2.0 benefits, but still require upgrading to 2.0


-- bruce (sqlwork.com)

 

[Kevin Spencer]

ASP.Net 2.0 is still in beta, and that's a good reason NOT to use it. Yet.
So, unless you really have a compelling reason TO use it, save yourself the
grief, and wait for the RTM.

--
HTH,

Kevin Spencer
Microsoft MVP
..Net Developer
Ambiguity has a certain quality to it.

 

[Steve C. Orr [MVP, MCSD]]

Nobody needs new features.
You could still be using DOS on an old Intel 486 computer. You'd have saved
a lot of money - except when you consider all the productivity you'd have
lost by not taking advantage of all the new and efficient capabilities that
modern systems provide.

 

[Jeffrey Todd]

<<Nobody needs new features.>>

LOL - Agreed!

I'm not a Ludite here... just trying to decide *when* I should look to
migrate (I have business decisions to make), and [when] will be decided in
part on *why* I'd migrate at all. If I can increase performance by 20% with
little code conversion, then I'd go right away... for example.

Thanks everyone for your responses.

Nobody needs new features.
You could still be using DOS on an old Intel 486 computer. You'd have
saved a lot of money - except when you consider all the productivity you'd
have lost by not taking advantage of all the new and efficient
capabilities that modern systems provide.

I have a heavy investment in an ASP.NET Web application built on 1.1. I
have read about a bunch of new features coming in ASP.NET 2.0, and I don't
see that I need the *new* features. So, what would be some good reasons
for me to switch to 2.0 if I don't need its new features. Are existing
features enhansed? Is overall performance improved substantially? What
would be some top benefits to migrate to 2.0 for someone who doesn't need
the new features? By "new features" I mean [things available in 2.0 that
simply aren't there in 1.1] - like master pages.

Thanks!

 

[lwti]

What a stupid answer!!!

Why not give some good reasons?

You say productivity, list them here and give numbers and test results on
exactly how much productive you would be?

.....Typical author who has no experience in the real world...just blabbing
away as a so-called "expert" HA!!

Nobody needs new features.
You could still be using DOS on an old Intel 486 computer. You'd have saved
a lot of money - except when you consider all the productivity you'd have
lost by not taking advantage of all the new and efficient capabilities that
modern systems provide.

I have a heavy investment in an ASP.NET Web application built on 1.1. I
have read about a bunch of new features coming in ASP.NET 2.0, and I don't
see that I need the *new* features. So, what would be some good reasons for
me to switch to 2.0 if I don't need its new features. Are existing features
enhansed? Is overall performance improved substantially? What would be some
top benefits to migrate to 2.0 for someone who doesn't need the new
features? By "new features" I mean [things available in 2.0 that simply
aren't there in 1.1] - like master pages.

Thanks!

 

[Jeffrey Todd]

<< What a stupid answer!!! >>

Sorry, but I think it's a brilliant answer ("Nobody needs new features"). It
is in fact a True statement.

So many times people upgrade for no reason... mindlessly upgrading just
because the new technology is "there" - like running 1GB+ of RAM on a box
that is used only for word processing or Web surfing. Other times people
find fault with new technology simply in an effort to justify their staying
in their comfort zone (i.e., remaining stuck). How many times have you seen
posts in this NG from people griping about ASP.NET while lauding classis ASP
or PHP which they are already comfortable with??? It happens almost every
week. I suspect Mr. Orr's answer is most likely based on lots of real-world
experience and observations... and likely intended to inspire thought about
the whole "should I upgrade?" question in general.

Just my take..

-JT

What a stupid answer!!!

Why not give some good reasons?

You say productivity, list them here and give numbers and test results on
exactly how much productive you would be?

....Typical author who has no experience in the real world...just blabbing
away as a so-called "expert" HA!!

Nobody needs new features.
You could still be using DOS on an old Intel 486 computer. You'd have saved
a lot of money - except when you consider all the productivity you'd have
lost by not taking advantage of all the new and efficient capabilities that
modern systems provide.

I have a heavy investment in an ASP.NET Web application built on 1.1. I
have read about a bunch of new features coming in ASP.NET 2.0, and I don't
see that I need the *new* features. So, what would be some good reasons for
me to switch to 2.0 if I don't need its new features. Are existing features
enhansed? Is overall performance improved substantially? What would be some
top benefits to migrate to 2.0 for someone who doesn't need the new
features? By "new features" I mean [things available in 2.0 that simply
aren't there in 1.1] - like master pages.

Thanks!