Wouldn't it be nice?

[Guest]

If all WebForms controls were prefixed 'web' and all WinForms controls were
prefixed ''win' (and were otherwise named the same?)

guy

 

[jim]

If all WebForms controls were prefixed 'web' and all WinForms controls
were
prefixed ''win' (and were otherwise named the same?)

Sure, it'd be nice. But it would also be nice if Microsoft listened to
everyday developers when designing this crap.

We can dream, can't we?

jim

 

[Kevin Spencer]

The Microsoft naming conventions are carefully considered by an experienced
team of designers and architects. They follow their naming conventions
strictly, giving a uniform naming style to all classes in the .Net
Framework. This means that, once you are familiar with the naming
conventions, it should be trivial to understand what the name of any given
class indicates about that class, and this includes the NameSpace in which
it resides. ASP.Net UI controls are all in the System.Web.UI NameSpace, and
specifically under 2 NameSpaces under that, System.Web.UI.WebControl, and
System.Web.UI.HtmlControl, which defines the basic characteristics shared by
all of them. Similarly, Windows Forms Controls all fall under the
System.Windows.Forms NameSpace.

--
HTH,

Kevin Spencer
Chicken Salad Surgeon
Microsoft MVP

 

[Guest]

Yes Kevin, I know where they live etc, I have been using .NET from beta 1

however I would much rather have controls called winGridv1, WinGridv2,
WebGridv2 etc. rather than all these DataGrid, DataGridView and such like

Guy

 

[Kevin Spencer]

Unfortunately, Microsoft doesn't design the .Net platform for your pleasure
alone. You have my sympathies.

--
HTH,

Kevin Spencer
Chicken Salad Surgeon
Microsoft MVP

 

[jdlwright]

Not necessarily disagreeing with you, but wondering why?
Documentation? Looking up answers on the web?

I doubt its your actual code because of course you have to import the
namespace you want to use, and if you use the toolbox you cant really
go wrong.

If its the stuff around that, then yes, looking for answers for
"DataGrid" can be annoying.

Is that what you mean?

 

[Guest]

Yes, it is simply that after doing (say) 6 months of WebForms stuff when I
change to a WinForms project I have forgotten the explicit control names so I
have to rummage around the documentation going through the different grids
(or whatever) to find the one I want.

If all Grid controls wete just called 'Grid', and prefixed 'win' or 'web'
with a Framework number or similar then I would know that I should be looking
for (say) a winGrid2.0

Basically it would be just make it easier to know what control to use

Guy

 

[jim]

Yes, it is simply that after doing (say) 6 months of WebForms stuff when I
change to a WinForms project I have forgotten the explicit control names
so I
have to rummage around the documentation going through the different grids
(or whatever) to find the one I want.

If all Grid controls wete just called 'Grid', and prefixed 'win' or 'web'
with a Framework number or similar then I would know that I should be
looking
for (say) a winGrid2.0

Basically it would be just make it easier to know what control to use

Guy

But that would be simplifying things. Microsoft knows that you can charge
more for complicated things because end users (quite wrongfully) equate
complication with power and capability.

Its the same reason for having multiple versions of the failing Vista OS.

A simplification of OS sales strategy that would pocket MS more cash would
be to put out a single, basic version of the OS that has modules built-in
(but disabled) that you can purchase and activate online. That way you run
and pay for only what you need and can add-on features at any time with just
a credit card and web connection.

And, while it is ture that end users (quite wrongfully) equate complication
with power and capability, the most successful software (i.e. the software
with the most users and most loyal following) always seems to be the simple
stuff.

For example, Visual Basic (up to and including version 6) had an estimated 3
to 6 million users (depending on which stats you follow). Meanwhile, VB.Net
has seen that number more than halved.

Why? Because VB.Net (affectionatley known as Fred.Net) is much more
complicated to code in, is more bloated in terms of distribution, is easier
to reverse engineer and is less responsive than it's true Visual Basic
forefathers.

But, don't hold your breath for MS to change the way they do things. I have
read on Microsoft blogs (the blog of the head developer of Office 2007 no
less) that Microsoft (paraphrasing here) "doesn't write code to please
customers. We write code to make money for investors."

If you are a large investor, MS *might* listen. If not, you are SOL, like
the rest of us.

jim