Hello,

I'm in a front of very serious .net redesign/rewrite of an old VB6
application.

I had been asked to make it .NET 2.0 and would like to ask couple of
questions regarding data access as this application is heavily data-centric
around MSDE database.

Would it be better to use custom business objects or extend
datasets/datatables for my classes?

This is what I'm thinking and just wanted to know if it's correct way.

Custom Bus. Object:
- Longer time to develop/test it.
- Loosely coupled with DataLayer.
- Extensible.

Datasets
- Faster/Easier.
- Tightly coupled with DataLayer.

I'm afraid that Microsoft is dropping ADO.NET and pushing WPF/Linq
initiative and don't want to end up rewriting business layer in 2-3 years to
adjust it to current framework.

Would like to hear your opinion and experiences...


Thanks ...

Hi Penelope Dramas,

If you want to rewrite it using Business Objects, there's a new book coming
out next month by Deborah Kurata (Microsoft MVP) that shows exactly how to
do that. I read it, and am using that methodology. It's called "Doing
Objects in VB2005".

You can kind of go either way. I think it's harder to do it with business
objects, but the data access is tighter because you have more control over
it.

And yet I know of another MVP leading a large project who uses strongly
typed datasets. She still has her design in 3-layers, but her data layer
passes back strongly typed datasets for use in the UI.

She generates the datasets herself from the stored procedures and removes
the table adapter because they *only* use stored procedures. I'm not
exactly certain how she does that, it's something I want to follow up on to
find out.

So I don't have a definitive answer for you, but maybe this information
will help in some way. Other people will definitely have an opinion, I'm
sure.

Robin S.
Ts'i mahnu uterna ot twan ot geifur hingts uto.
-----------------------------------------------
"Penelope Dramas" <penelopeDOTdramasATpro-transportDOTcom> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> Hello,
>
> I'm in a front of very serious .net redesign/rewrite of an old VB6
> application.
>
> I had been asked to make it .NET 2.0 and would like to ask couple of
> questions regarding data access as this application is heavily
> data-centric around MSDE database.
>
> Would it be better to use custom business objects or extend
> datasets/datatables for my classes?
>
> This is what I'm thinking and just wanted to know if it's correct way.
>
> Custom Bus. Object:
> - Longer time to develop/test it.
> - Loosely coupled with DataLayer.
> - Extensible.
>
> Datasets
> - Faster/Easier.
> - Tightly coupled with DataLayer.
>
> I'm afraid that Microsoft is dropping ADO.NET and pushing WPF/Linq
> initiative and don't want to end up rewriting business layer in 2-3 years
> to adjust it to current framework.
>
> Would like to hear your opinion and experiences...
>
>
> Thanks ...
>

"Penelope Dramas" <penelopeDOTdramasATpro-transportDOTcom> wrote in
news:(E-Mail Removed):

> Custom Bus. Object:
> - Longer time to develop/test it.
> - Loosely coupled with DataLayer.
> - Extensible.
>
> Datasets
> - Faster/Easier.
> - Tightly coupled with DataLayer.

Take a look at LLBLGen. LLBLGen Pro is a third party DAL which is very good
at auto-generating custom business objects.

The developer of LLBLGen Pro is planning to make it LINQ compatible too.

So in a sense, you get the feature of LINQ now - and with future linq
compatibility!

Go here

http://sholliday.spaces.live.com/blog/

6/5/2006
Custom Objects and Tiered Development II // 2.0

and

5/24/2006
Custom Objects/Collections and Tiered Development


The second one is 1.1, however.

Run some times to see the difference between populating your custom business
objects with an IDataReader vs populating strong DataSets.
You ~~will be surprised.

I mention a MS KB at the bottom on the 1.1 article "bird's eye view". Read
that thing several times.

On a system I need to upkeep, I 99% of the time go with Custom Objects now.

On reports, I go back to strong datasets.



"Penelope Dramas" <penelopeDOTdramasATpro-transportDOTcom> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> Hello,
>
> I'm in a front of very serious .net redesign/rewrite of an old VB6
> application.
>
> I had been asked to make it .NET 2.0 and would like to ask couple of
> questions regarding data access as this application is heavily
data-centric
> around MSDE database.
>
> Would it be better to use custom business objects or extend
> datasets/datatables for my classes?
>
> This is what I'm thinking and just wanted to know if it's correct way.
>
> Custom Bus. Object:
> - Longer time to develop/test it.
> - Loosely coupled with DataLayer.
> - Extensible.
>
> Datasets
> - Faster/Easier.
> - Tightly coupled with DataLayer.
>
> I'm afraid that Microsoft is dropping ADO.NET and pushing WPF/Linq
> initiative and don't want to end up rewriting business layer in 2-3 years
to
> adjust it to current framework.
>
> Would like to hear your opinion and experiences...
>
>
> Thanks ...
>
>

Thank you all for insight, I will buy that book feb 21 when it's coming out.

I don't think i will go with any code generators, we have already looked
into DevExpress XPO as well as CodeSmith but I would like to do it myself
and learn it better.

Am I right when I'm thinking that Microsoft might drop ADO.NET for good or
there's no reason to panic ?



"RobinS" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> Hi Penelope Dramas,
>
> If you want to rewrite it using Business Objects, there's a new book
> coming out next month by Deborah Kurata (Microsoft MVP) that shows exactly
> how to do that. I read it, and am using that methodology. It's called
> "Doing Objects in VB2005".
>
> You can kind of go either way. I think it's harder to do it with business
> objects, but the data access is tighter because you have more control over
> it.
>
> And yet I know of another MVP leading a large project who uses strongly
> typed datasets. She still has her design in 3-layers, but her data layer
> passes back strongly typed datasets for use in the UI.
>
> She generates the datasets herself from the stored procedures and removes
> the table adapter because they *only* use stored procedures. I'm not
> exactly certain how she does that, it's something I want to follow up on
> to find out.
>
> So I don't have a definitive answer for you, but maybe this information
> will help in some way. Other people will definitely have an opinion, I'm
> sure.
>
> Robin S.
> Ts'i mahnu uterna ot twan ot geifur hingts uto.
> -----------------------------------------------
> "Penelope Dramas" <penelopeDOTdramasATpro-transportDOTcom> wrote in
> message news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>> Hello,
>>
>> I'm in a front of very serious .net redesign/rewrite of an old VB6
>> application.
>>
>> I had been asked to make it .NET 2.0 and would like to ask couple of
>> questions regarding data access as this application is heavily
>> data-centric around MSDE database.
>>
>> Would it be better to use custom business objects or extend
>> datasets/datatables for my classes?
>>
>> This is what I'm thinking and just wanted to know if it's correct way.
>>
>> Custom Bus. Object:
>> - Longer time to develop/test it.
>> - Loosely coupled with DataLayer.
>> - Extensible.
>>
>> Datasets
>> - Faster/Easier.
>> - Tightly coupled with DataLayer.
>>
>> I'm afraid that Microsoft is dropping ADO.NET and pushing WPF/Linq
>> initiative and don't want to end up rewriting business layer in 2-3 years
>> to adjust it to current framework.
>>
>> Would like to hear your opinion and experiences...
>>
>>
>> Thanks ...
>>
>
>

If you have a subscription to Safari, you can see Deborah Kurata's book
online. I understand it has been made available, or at least parts of it.
Amazon says it's going to be available 2/21.

http://www.amazon.com/Objects-Visual...e=UTF8&s=books

I can't even *imagine* that Microsoft would drop ADO.Net, at least not in
the next couple of years. Farther ahead than that, who knows what they will
do. They seem headed in the XML direction, but I just don't see it for huge
amounts of data. Plus, it would hardly be in their best interest,
considering how hard they have worked to make SQLServer a viable
alternative to Oracle. So there has to be *some* way to transfer data back
and forth to SQLServer!

Robin S.
---------------------------------------
"Penelope Dramas" <penelopeDOTdramasATpro-transportDOTcom> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> Thank you all for insight, I will buy that book feb 21 when it's coming
> out.
>
> I don't think i will go with any code generators, we have already looked
> into DevExpress XPO as well as CodeSmith but I would like to do it
> myself and learn it better.
>
> Am I right when I'm thinking that Microsoft might drop ADO.NET for good
> or there's no reason to panic ?
>
>
>
> "RobinS" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>> Hi Penelope Dramas,
>>
>> If you want to rewrite it using Business Objects, there's a new book
>> coming out next month by Deborah Kurata (Microsoft MVP) that shows
>> exactly how to do that. I read it, and am using that methodology. It's
>> called "Doing Objects in VB2005".
>>
>> You can kind of go either way. I think it's harder to do it with
>> business objects, but the data access is tighter because you have more
>> control over it.
>>
>> And yet I know of another MVP leading a large project who uses strongly
>> typed datasets. She still has her design in 3-layers, but her data layer
>> passes back strongly typed datasets for use in the UI.
>>
>> She generates the datasets herself from the stored procedures and
>> removes the table adapter because they *only* use stored procedures. I'm
>> not exactly certain how she does that, it's something I want to follow
>> up on to find out.
>>
>> So I don't have a definitive answer for you, but maybe this information
>> will help in some way. Other people will definitely have an opinion, I'm
>> sure.
>>
>> Robin S.
>> Ts'i mahnu uterna ot twan ot geifur hingts uto.
>> -----------------------------------------------
>> "Penelope Dramas" <penelopeDOTdramasATpro-transportDOTcom> wrote in
>> message news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> I'm in a front of very serious .net redesign/rewrite of an old VB6
>>> application.
>>>
>>> I had been asked to make it .NET 2.0 and would like to ask couple of
>>> questions regarding data access as this application is heavily
>>> data-centric around MSDE database.
>>>
>>> Would it be better to use custom business objects or extend
>>> datasets/datatables for my classes?
>>>
>>> This is what I'm thinking and just wanted to know if it's correct way.
>>>
>>> Custom Bus. Object:
>>> - Longer time to develop/test it.
>>> - Loosely coupled with DataLayer.
>>> - Extensible.
>>>
>>> Datasets
>>> - Faster/Easier.
>>> - Tightly coupled with DataLayer.
>>>
>>> I'm afraid that Microsoft is dropping ADO.NET and pushing WPF/Linq
>>> initiative and don't want to end up rewriting business layer in 2-3
>>> years to adjust it to current framework.
>>>
>>> Would like to hear your opinion and experiences...
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks ...
>>>
>>
>>
>
>

You can also check out Rockford Lhotka's books if you want to know more
about Business Object ; he's very well-known in the field. I have looked at
them, but not read them. Deborah's book seemed a lot more "hands-on" to me,
and less theory.

Just my opinion.
Robin S.
---------------------------------
"RobinS" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> If you have a subscription to Safari, you can see Deborah Kurata's book
> online. I understand it has been made available, or at least parts of it.
> Amazon says it's going to be available 2/21.
>
> http://www.amazon.com/Objects-Visual...e=UTF8&s=books
>
> I can't even *imagine* that Microsoft would drop ADO.Net, at least not in
> the next couple of years. Farther ahead than that, who knows what they
> will do. They seem headed in the XML direction, but I just don't see it
> for huge amounts of data. Plus, it would hardly be in their best
> interest, considering how hard they have worked to make SQLServer a
> viable alternative to Oracle. So there has to be *some* way to transfer
> data back and forth to SQLServer!
>
> Robin S.
> ---------------------------------------
> "Penelope Dramas" <penelopeDOTdramasATpro-transportDOTcom> wrote in
> message news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>> Thank you all for insight, I will buy that book feb 21 when it's coming
>> out.
>>
>> I don't think i will go with any code generators, we have already looked
>> into DevExpress XPO as well as CodeSmith but I would like to do it
>> myself and learn it better.
>>
>> Am I right when I'm thinking that Microsoft might drop ADO.NET for good
>> or there's no reason to panic ?
>>
>>
>>
>> "RobinS" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>>> Hi Penelope Dramas,
>>>
>>> If you want to rewrite it using Business Objects, there's a new book
>>> coming out next month by Deborah Kurata (Microsoft MVP) that shows
>>> exactly how to do that. I read it, and am using that methodology. It's
>>> called "Doing Objects in VB2005".
>>>
>>> You can kind of go either way. I think it's harder to do it with
>>> business objects, but the data access is tighter because you have more
>>> control over it.
>>>
>>> And yet I know of another MVP leading a large project who uses strongly
>>> typed datasets. She still has her design in 3-layers, but her data
>>> layer passes back strongly typed datasets for use in the UI.
>>>
>>> She generates the datasets herself from the stored procedures and
>>> removes the table adapter because they *only* use stored procedures.
>>> I'm not exactly certain how she does that, it's something I want to
>>> follow up on to find out.
>>>
>>> So I don't have a definitive answer for you, but maybe this information
>>> will help in some way. Other people will definitely have an opinion,
>>> I'm sure.
>>>
>>> Robin S.
>>> Ts'i mahnu uterna ot twan ot geifur hingts uto.
>>> -----------------------------------------------
>>> "Penelope Dramas" <penelopeDOTdramasATpro-transportDOTcom> wrote in
>>> message news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>>>> Hello,
>>>>
>>>> I'm in a front of very serious .net redesign/rewrite of an old VB6
>>>> application.
>>>>
>>>> I had been asked to make it .NET 2.0 and would like to ask couple of
>>>> questions regarding data access as this application is heavily
>>>> data-centric around MSDE database.
>>>>
>>>> Would it be better to use custom business objects or extend
>>>> datasets/datatables for my classes?
>>>>
>>>> This is what I'm thinking and just wanted to know if it's correct way.
>>>>
>>>> Custom Bus. Object:
>>>> - Longer time to develop/test it.
>>>> - Loosely coupled with DataLayer.
>>>> - Extensible.
>>>>
>>>> Datasets
>>>> - Faster/Easier.
>>>> - Tightly coupled with DataLayer.
>>>>
>>>> I'm afraid that Microsoft is dropping ADO.NET and pushing WPF/Linq
>>>> initiative and don't want to end up rewriting business layer in 2-3
>>>> years to adjust it to current framework.
>>>>
>>>> Would like to hear your opinion and experiences...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks ...
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>

Also, If you don't have a subscription to Safari, your local libray might.
I checked my county libray here in CA and I can get access to Safari online
at home.

Jason Vermillion

"RobinS" wrote:
> If you have a subscription to Safari, you can see Deborah Kurata's book
> online. I understand it has been made available, or at least parts of it.
> Amazon says it's going to be available 2/21.
>
> http://www.amazon.com/Objects-Visual...e=UTF8&s=books
>
> I can't even *imagine* that Microsoft would drop ADO.Net, at least not in
> the next couple of years. Farther ahead than that, who knows what they will
> do. They seem headed in the XML direction, but I just don't see it for huge
> amounts of data. Plus, it would hardly be in their best interest,
> considering how hard they have worked to make SQLServer a viable
> alternative to Oracle. So there has to be *some* way to transfer data back
> and forth to SQLServer!
>
> Robin S.
> ---------------------------------------
> "Penelope Dramas" <penelopeDOTdramasATpro-transportDOTcom> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> > Thank you all for insight, I will buy that book feb 21 when it's coming
> > out.
> >
> > I don't think i will go with any code generators, we have already looked
> > into DevExpress XPO as well as CodeSmith but I would like to do it
> > myself and learn it better.
> >
> > Am I right when I'm thinking that Microsoft might drop ADO.NET for good
> > or there's no reason to panic ?
> >
> >
> >
> > "RobinS" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> > news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> >> Hi Penelope Dramas,
> >>
> >> If you want to rewrite it using Business Objects, there's a new book
> >> coming out next month by Deborah Kurata (Microsoft MVP) that shows
> >> exactly how to do that. I read it, and am using that methodology. It's
> >> called "Doing Objects in VB2005".
> >>
> >> You can kind of go either way. I think it's harder to do it with
> >> business objects, but the data access is tighter because you have more
> >> control over it.
> >>
> >> And yet I know of another MVP leading a large project who uses strongly
> >> typed datasets. She still has her design in 3-layers, but her data layer
> >> passes back strongly typed datasets for use in the UI.
> >>
> >> She generates the datasets herself from the stored procedures and
> >> removes the table adapter because they *only* use stored procedures. I'm
> >> not exactly certain how she does that, it's something I want to follow
> >> up on to find out.
> >>
> >> So I don't have a definitive answer for you, but maybe this information
> >> will help in some way. Other people will definitely have an opinion, I'm
> >> sure.
> >>
> >> Robin S.
> >> Ts'i mahnu uterna ot twan ot geifur hingts uto.
> >> -----------------------------------------------
> >> "Penelope Dramas" <penelopeDOTdramasATpro-transportDOTcom> wrote in
> >> message news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> >>> Hello,
> >>>
> >>> I'm in a front of very serious .net redesign/rewrite of an old VB6
> >>> application.
> >>>
> >>> I had been asked to make it .NET 2.0 and would like to ask couple of
> >>> questions regarding data access as this application is heavily
> >>> data-centric around MSDE database.
> >>>
> >>> Would it be better to use custom business objects or extend
> >>> datasets/datatables for my classes?
> >>>
> >>> This is what I'm thinking and just wanted to know if it's correct way.
> >>>
> >>> Custom Bus. Object:
> >>> - Longer time to develop/test it.
> >>> - Loosely coupled with DataLayer.
> >>> - Extensible.
> >>>
> >>> Datasets
> >>> - Faster/Easier.
> >>> - Tightly coupled with DataLayer.
> >>>
> >>> I'm afraid that Microsoft is dropping ADO.NET and pushing WPF/Linq
> >>> initiative and don't want to end up rewriting business layer in 2-3
> >>> years to adjust it to current framework.
> >>>
> >>> Would like to hear your opinion and experiences...
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Thanks ...
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
>

Oh, that's really cool. Is that CA as in California, or CA as in Canada? If
it's California, I'm heading down to the library to see if mine has that
capability.

Robin S.
-------------------------------
"Jason Vermillion" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
message news:89904698-E254-41C5-9B01-(E-Mail Removed)...
>
> Also, If you don't have a subscription to Safari, your local libray
> might.
> I checked my county libray here in CA and I can get access to Safari
> online
> at home.
>
> Jason Vermillion
>
> "RobinS" wrote:
>> If you have a subscription to Safari, you can see Deborah Kurata's book
>> online. I understand it has been made available, or at least parts of
>> it.
>> Amazon says it's going to be available 2/21.
>>
>> http://www.amazon.com/Objects-Visual...e=UTF8&s=books
>>
>> I can't even *imagine* that Microsoft would drop ADO.Net, at least not
>> in
>> the next couple of years. Farther ahead than that, who knows what they
>> will
>> do. They seem headed in the XML direction, but I just don't see it for
>> huge
>> amounts of data. Plus, it would hardly be in their best interest,
>> considering how hard they have worked to make SQLServer a viable
>> alternative to Oracle. So there has to be *some* way to transfer data
>> back
>> and forth to SQLServer!
>>
>> Robin S.
>> ---------------------------------------
>> "Penelope Dramas" <penelopeDOTdramasATpro-transportDOTcom> wrote in
>> message
>> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>> > Thank you all for insight, I will buy that book feb 21 when it's
>> > coming
>> > out.
>> >
>> > I don't think i will go with any code generators, we have already
>> > looked
>> > into DevExpress XPO as well as CodeSmith but I would like to do it
>> > myself and learn it better.
>> >
>> > Am I right when I'm thinking that Microsoft might drop ADO.NET for
>> > good
>> > or there's no reason to panic ?
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > "RobinS" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>> > news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>> >> Hi Penelope Dramas,
>> >>
>> >> If you want to rewrite it using Business Objects, there's a new book
>> >> coming out next month by Deborah Kurata (Microsoft MVP) that shows
>> >> exactly how to do that. I read it, and am using that methodology.
>> >> It's
>> >> called "Doing Objects in VB2005".
>> >>
>> >> You can kind of go either way. I think it's harder to do it with
>> >> business objects, but the data access is tighter because you have
>> >> more
>> >> control over it.
>> >>
>> >> And yet I know of another MVP leading a large project who uses
>> >> strongly
>> >> typed datasets. She still has her design in 3-layers, but her data
>> >> layer
>> >> passes back strongly typed datasets for use in the UI.
>> >>
>> >> She generates the datasets herself from the stored procedures and
>> >> removes the table adapter because they *only* use stored procedures.
>> >> I'm
>> >> not exactly certain how she does that, it's something I want to
>> >> follow
>> >> up on to find out.
>> >>
>> >> So I don't have a definitive answer for you, but maybe this
>> >> information
>> >> will help in some way. Other people will definitely have an opinion,
>> >> I'm
>> >> sure.
>> >>
>> >> Robin S.
>> >> Ts'i mahnu uterna ot twan ot geifur hingts uto.
>> >> -----------------------------------------------
>> >> "Penelope Dramas" <penelopeDOTdramasATpro-transportDOTcom> wrote in
>> >> message news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>> >>> Hello,
>> >>>
>> >>> I'm in a front of very serious .net redesign/rewrite of an old VB6
>> >>> application.
>> >>>
>> >>> I had been asked to make it .NET 2.0 and would like to ask couple of
>> >>> questions regarding data access as this application is heavily
>> >>> data-centric around MSDE database.
>> >>>
>> >>> Would it be better to use custom business objects or extend
>> >>> datasets/datatables for my classes?
>> >>>
>> >>> This is what I'm thinking and just wanted to know if it's correct
>> >>> way.
>> >>>
>> >>> Custom Bus. Object:
>> >>> - Longer time to develop/test it.
>> >>> - Loosely coupled with DataLayer.
>> >>> - Extensible.
>> >>>
>> >>> Datasets
>> >>> - Faster/Easier.
>> >>> - Tightly coupled with DataLayer.
>> >>>
>> >>> I'm afraid that Microsoft is dropping ADO.NET and pushing WPF/Linq
>> >>> initiative and don't want to end up rewriting business layer in 2-3
>> >>> years to adjust it to current framework.
>> >>>
>> >>> Would like to hear your opinion and experiences...
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> Thanks ...
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>

Penelope,

If you think about buying Deborah's book, than certainly don't forget to buy
the books from David and Bill (Sceppa and Vaughn). The last two are .Net
specialists as long as .Net exist.

Cor

"Penelope Dramas" <penelopeDOTdramasATpro-transportDOTcom> schreef in
bericht news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> Thank you all for insight, I will buy that book feb 21 when it's coming
> out.
>
> I don't think i will go with any code generators, we have already looked
> into DevExpress XPO as well as CodeSmith but I would like to do it myself
> and learn it better.
>
> Am I right when I'm thinking that Microsoft might drop ADO.NET for good or
> there's no reason to panic ?
>
>
>
> "RobinS" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>> Hi Penelope Dramas,
>>
>> If you want to rewrite it using Business Objects, there's a new book
>> coming out next month by Deborah Kurata (Microsoft MVP) that shows
>> exactly how to do that. I read it, and am using that methodology. It's
>> called "Doing Objects in VB2005".
>>
>> You can kind of go either way. I think it's harder to do it with business
>> objects, but the data access is tighter because you have more control
>> over it.
>>
>> And yet I know of another MVP leading a large project who uses strongly
>> typed datasets. She still has her design in 3-layers, but her data layer
>> passes back strongly typed datasets for use in the UI.
>>
>> She generates the datasets herself from the stored procedures and removes
>> the table adapter because they *only* use stored procedures. I'm not
>> exactly certain how she does that, it's something I want to follow up on
>> to find out.
>>
>> So I don't have a definitive answer for you, but maybe this information
>> will help in some way. Other people will definitely have an opinion, I'm
>> sure.
>>
>> Robin S.
>> Ts'i mahnu uterna ot twan ot geifur hingts uto.
>> -----------------------------------------------
>> "Penelope Dramas" <penelopeDOTdramasATpro-transportDOTcom> wrote in
>> message news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> I'm in a front of very serious .net redesign/rewrite of an old VB6
>>> application.
>>>
>>> I had been asked to make it .NET 2.0 and would like to ask couple of
>>> questions regarding data access as this application is heavily
>>> data-centric around MSDE database.
>>>
>>> Would it be better to use custom business objects or extend
>>> datasets/datatables for my classes?
>>>
>>> This is what I'm thinking and just wanted to know if it's correct way.
>>>
>>> Custom Bus. Object:
>>> - Longer time to develop/test it.
>>> - Loosely coupled with DataLayer.
>>> - Extensible.
>>>
>>> Datasets
>>> - Faster/Easier.
>>> - Tightly coupled with DataLayer.
>>>
>>> I'm afraid that Microsoft is dropping ADO.NET and pushing WPF/Linq
>>> initiative and don't want to end up rewriting business layer in 2-3
>>> years to adjust it to current framework.
>>>
>>> Would like to hear your opinion and experiences...
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks ...
>>>
>>
>>
>
>