ASP.Net confusion between 1.1 and 2.0

Discussion in 'Microsoft ADO .NET' started by Brent, May 23, 2006.

  1. Brent

    Brent Guest

    Ok guys/gals i have the task of upgrading a app at work from asp.net 1.1 to
    2.0. Since ive only worked with .Net briefly and asp.net once i need a
    little help here. I have been googling around and really haven't got the
    answer to my question.

    I guess my confusion started when we had a meeting on this conversion. The
    guy here at work who has done most of our asp.net work told my mananger that
    the conversion of asp.net 1.1 to 2.0 might be sticky a little bit because
    previously they only had to deploy 1 dll. He said with this new version it
    compiles each page as a dll so there would be many more dlls to deploy. Ok
    this has confused me. When you deployed a 1.1 asp.net app didn't you only
    have to deploy the aspx pages, code behind pages (.vb or .cs), and the dlls
    that you referenced in your asp.net app? When you ran the page .net would
    compile your entire application and stick the dll in a temp directory on the
    web server. Am i incorrect? If i am correct what does compiling a web
    project really do other than do maybe syntax checking when you do it from
    the IDE?

    Ok people this is where im confused. I know .Net has that new Precompile
    thing so people can't look at your source files if they break into your web
    server but i don't think we are going to be doing that as far as i know. I
    know with 2.0 a new feature was the ability to use a different langauge on
    each page but i would just think this compile each dll into the temp
    directory for the web page.

    Any help would be appreciated.

    thanks,
    Brent
     
    Brent, May 23, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Brent,

    There are three versions of ASPNET comparing to ASP both for 1.x as for 2.0
    A kind of way as is complete as ASP with some new statements
    A kind of way with codeBehind but still everytime compiled at runtime
    A kind of way with build code Behind, everytime build when you debug it as
    well buildable as in every DotNet project.
    (The last method is as I use).

    The same exist in ASPNET 2.0 with the difference that the build for real is
    done in the Publish phase. (There are some moves back from the extreme
    difference between a ASPNET application and all other dotNet applications
    which were in the first release from 2.0, you can download those changes
    from the ASPNET website).

    CodeBehind has in 2.0 the name CodePage.

    I hope this helps,

    Cor

    "Brent" <> schreef in bericht
    news:%...
    > Ok guys/gals i have the task of upgrading a app at work from asp.net 1.1
    > to 2.0. Since ive only worked with .Net briefly and asp.net once i need a
    > little help here. I have been googling around and really haven't got the
    > answer to my question.
    >
    > I guess my confusion started when we had a meeting on this conversion. The
    > guy here at work who has done most of our asp.net work told my mananger
    > that the conversion of asp.net 1.1 to 2.0 might be sticky a little bit
    > because previously they only had to deploy 1 dll. He said with this new
    > version it compiles each page as a dll so there would be many more dlls to
    > deploy. Ok this has confused me. When you deployed a 1.1 asp.net app
    > didn't you only have to deploy the aspx pages, code behind pages (.vb or
    > .cs), and the dlls that you referenced in your asp.net app? When you ran
    > the page .net would compile your entire application and stick the dll in a
    > temp directory on the web server. Am i incorrect? If i am correct what
    > does compiling a web project really do other than do maybe syntax checking
    > when you do it from the IDE?
    >
    > Ok people this is where im confused. I know .Net has that new Precompile
    > thing so people can't look at your source files if they break into your
    > web server but i don't think we are going to be doing that as far as i
    > know. I know with 2.0 a new feature was the ability to use a different
    > langauge on each page but i would just think this compile each dll into
    > the temp directory for the web page.
    >
    > Any help would be appreciated.
    >
    > thanks,
    > Brent
    >
     
    Cor Ligthert [MVP], May 24, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Brent

    Brent Guest

    Ok let me make sure i have this straight. In asp.net 1.1 when you compiled a
    web page there was a dll that needed to be deployed with your web app in the
    bin directory. With asp.net 2.0 if your not going to be precompiling your
    pages (which i don't think we are) and we won't be using the publish or WSD.
    We will just be using a xcopy then you don't have to worry about copying any
    dlls to the web server because asp.net will compile them on the fly.

    thanks,
    Brent
    "Brent" <> wrote in message
    news:%...
    > Ok guys/gals i have the task of upgrading a app at work from asp.net 1.1
    > to 2.0. Since ive only worked with .Net briefly and asp.net once i need a
    > little help here. I have been googling around and really haven't got the
    > answer to my question.
    >
    > I guess my confusion started when we had a meeting on this conversion. The
    > guy here at work who has done most of our asp.net work told my mananger
    > that the conversion of asp.net 1.1 to 2.0 might be sticky a little bit
    > because previously they only had to deploy 1 dll. He said with this new
    > version it compiles each page as a dll so there would be many more dlls to
    > deploy. Ok this has confused me. When you deployed a 1.1 asp.net app
    > didn't you only have to deploy the aspx pages, code behind pages (.vb or
    > .cs), and the dlls that you referenced in your asp.net app? When you ran
    > the page .net would compile your entire application and stick the dll in a
    > temp directory on the web server. Am i incorrect? If i am correct what
    > does compiling a web project really do other than do maybe syntax checking
    > when you do it from the IDE?
    >
    > Ok people this is where im confused. I know .Net has that new Precompile
    > thing so people can't look at your source files if they break into your
    > web server but i don't think we are going to be doing that as far as i
    > know. I know with 2.0 a new feature was the ability to use a different
    > langauge on each page but i would just think this compile each dll into
    > the temp directory for the web page.
    >
    > Any help would be appreciated.
    >
    > thanks,
    > Brent
    >
     
    Brent, May 24, 2006
    #3
  4. Brent,

    You are not the only one, I wrote that they are (very partial) changing back
    behaviour from 2.0 to 1.x style again.

    Have a look at the webpage

    www.aspnet.net

    As far as I know is it normal from Microsoft.

    Cor

    "Brent" <> schreef in bericht
    news:...
    > Ok let me make sure i have this straight. In asp.net 1.1 when you compiled
    > a web page there was a dll that needed to be deployed with your web app in
    > the bin directory. With asp.net 2.0 if your not going to be precompiling
    > your pages (which i don't think we are) and we won't be using the publish
    > or WSD. We will just be using a xcopy then you don't have to worry about
    > copying any dlls to the web server because asp.net will compile them on
    > the fly.
    >
    > thanks,
    > Brent
    > "Brent" <> wrote in message
    > news:%...
    >> Ok guys/gals i have the task of upgrading a app at work from asp.net 1.1
    >> to 2.0. Since ive only worked with .Net briefly and asp.net once i need a
    >> little help here. I have been googling around and really haven't got the
    >> answer to my question.
    >>
    >> I guess my confusion started when we had a meeting on this conversion.
    >> The guy here at work who has done most of our asp.net work told my
    >> mananger that the conversion of asp.net 1.1 to 2.0 might be sticky a
    >> little bit because previously they only had to deploy 1 dll. He said with
    >> this new version it compiles each page as a dll so there would be many
    >> more dlls to deploy. Ok this has confused me. When you deployed a 1.1
    >> asp.net app didn't you only have to deploy the aspx pages, code behind
    >> pages (.vb or .cs), and the dlls that you referenced in your asp.net app?
    >> When you ran the page .net would compile your entire application and
    >> stick the dll in a temp directory on the web server. Am i incorrect? If i
    >> am correct what does compiling a web project really do other than do
    >> maybe syntax checking when you do it from the IDE?
    >>
    >> Ok people this is where im confused. I know .Net has that new Precompile
    >> thing so people can't look at your source files if they break into your
    >> web server but i don't think we are going to be doing that as far as i
    >> know. I know with 2.0 a new feature was the ability to use a different
    >> langauge on each page but i would just think this compile each dll into
    >> the temp directory for the web page.
    >>
    >> Any help would be appreciated.
    >>
    >> thanks,
    >> Brent
    >>

    >
    >
     
    Cor Ligthert [MVP], May 24, 2006
    #4
  5. Brent

    Shawn B. Guest

    It may not be exactly what you're asking for, but they just released a Web
    Application Project add-in for Visual Studio that completely restores the
    old 1.x web project paradigm to VS 2005 (and even enabled Edit-N-Continue
    for that web project when debugging). It will be officially released as a
    part of the SP1 for VS 2005 and will be supported thereafter with VS.

    We used it to migrate from 1.x to 2.0 (thousands of web pages) and it worked
    like a charm. There was almost nothing to it. At least, as such, using,
    will eliminate any confusion. The Web Project paradigm introduced with 2.0
    confuses everyone and isn't suitable for our needs.


    Thanks,
    Shawn
     
    Shawn B., May 26, 2006
    #5
    1. Advertisements

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Matthew Louden

    ASP.NET run-time error: ASP.NET ADO User Registered Failure

    Matthew Louden, Oct 11, 2003, in forum: Microsoft ADO .NET
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    197
    steve
    Oct 11, 2003
  2. Matthew Louden

    how ASP.NET page gets user input from another ASP.NET page??

    Matthew Louden, Nov 22, 2003, in forum: Microsoft ADO .NET
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    337
    Fahad Al Hadhrami
    Nov 24, 2003
  3. John Howard

    ASP.Net/ADO.Net/VB.Net/Access - need example

    John Howard, Jan 12, 2004, in forum: Microsoft ADO .NET
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    180
    William Ryan
    Jan 12, 2004
  4. Guest
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    173
    Guest
    Mar 23, 2005
  5. ABC
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    198
Loading...

Share This Page