Solve : .net?

1.	Solve : .net?
Answer» Hi every body what is the different between 1- VB and VB.net 2- asp and asp.net 3- c++ and c Thank you 1. VB.NET uses the microsoft net framework and VB does not. Also VB is GOOD and .NET sucks. 2. Same as above 3. C++ is an object oriented and C is not. ================================= Links: 1. http://www.thescarms.com/vbasic/vb6vsvbnet.aspx, http://excessive.wordpress.com/2008/08/03/why-net-sucks/ 2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Active_Server_Pages 3. http://unthought.net/c++/c_vs_c++.html Sigh, I was going to write a post about why .NET doesn't suck. But then I realized how pointless that would be. 1. Arguing with a someone who's opinion about something is that it "sucks" is about as useful as banging your head against a brick wall. (And btw. Linux711, VB also relies on a separate framework just like VB.NET.) 2. It wouldn't do you, feras, any good. So instead I'll post a few links that can, hopefully, answer your questions. VB vs VB.NET http://www.sqlmag.com/Article/ArticleID/21050/sql_server_21050.html ASP vs ASP.NET http://www.w3schools.com/aspnet/aspnet_vsasp.asp C++ vs. C http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C%2B%2B Quote from: feras on July 01, 2009, 12:21:43 PM Hi every body what is the different between 1- VB and VB.net 2- asp and asp.net 3- c++ and c Thank you Do your own homework.VB6 (often referred to as VB classic) as stated uses it's own run-time objects & procedures. MS decided with the first installment of .NET to completely revamp the language- get rid of all that silly stuff from the old, MS-DOS BASIC's. Visual Basic .NET is a good language, in my opinion, it isn't really Visual Basic anymore- it's close, but it feels different. It is, however, a great language in and of itself. Personally, I do most of my development in VB6; I barely touch .NET at the current time. It doesn't suck, though- it's just different. Some people resist change fiercely ) I am a Linux person, so it is hard for me to say that anything Microsoft is good. But I think that VB6 was one of the better things they made. pragma I know that both VB and VB.NET rely on a framework to operate. I think the VB framework is better than .NET because it is SMALLER and faster. I also have heard that Microsoft created .NET to make programs harder to port to other operating systems. Quote from: Linux711 on July 05, 2009, 10:29:30 PM I am a Linux person, so it is hard for me to say that anything Microsoft is good. But I think that VB6 was one of the better things they made. pragma I know that both VB and VB.NET rely on a framework to operate. I think the VB framework is better than .NET because it is smaller and faster. I also have heard that Microsoft created .NET to make programs harder to port to other operating systems. And VB6 is easier () Quote from: Linux711 on July 05, 2009, 10:29:30 PM pragma I know that both VB and VB.NET rely on a framework to operate. I think the VB framework is better than .NET because it is smaller and faster. I also have heard that Microsoft created .NET to make programs harder to port to other operating systems. Yeah that's right. They spent millions of dollars and thousands of man hours just to spite the Linux community, because Microsoft is super villain evil. Right now Bill Gates is laughing his censored of in his fortress of doom. I really hate having to be the one defending Microsoft here, because I'm really not that big of a fan. They have done plenty of things wrong, but lets at least get the facts straight. The truth is that Microsoft created the .NET framework to make it easier and faster to develop software for the Windows platform, and perhaps most importantly, make it easier to port software between different Windows platforms. Is software that relies on .NET harder to port to another platform? No not really, .NET code is compiled to byte code, just like Java. In theory this can be execute on any platform with a .NET virtual machine, again just like Java. It is not an evil scheme, just good business sense, to only support it on their own platforms. Microsoft have no interest in creating another Java. But Microsoft have done absolutely nothing to stop other people from PORTING the .NET framework. Ever heard of Mono? In fact Microsoft is indirectly sponsoring Mono through their partnership with Novell. IMO it would be easier to port a .NET APPLICATION then it would a application made with VB6... So that whole "They did it to make it harder to port" nonsense doesn't really work. VB6 compiles to either P-Code or Machine code; either way, it always outputs a windows executable. .NET programs compile, as pragma said, to bytecode. All that's needed is a CLR for the other OS's- and given the fact that WINE essentially duplicates the windows API itself I don't see the task of creating a CLR for Linux or mac as too difficult for the Linux people.

Answer»

Hi every body

what is the different between
1- VB and VB.net
2- asp and asp.net
3- c++ and c

Thank you 1. VB.NET uses the microsoft net framework and VB does not. Also VB is GOOD and .NET sucks.

2. Same as above

3. C++ is an object oriented and C is not.

=================================

Links:

1. http://www.thescarms.com/vbasic/vb6vsvbnet.aspx, http://excessive.wordpress.com/2008/08/03/why-net-sucks/

2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Active_Server_Pages

3. http://unthought.net/c++/c_vs_c++.html Sigh, I was going to write a post about why .NET doesn't suck. But then I realized how pointless that would be.
1. Arguing with a someone who's opinion about something is that it "sucks" is about as useful as banging your head against a brick wall.
(And btw. Linux711, VB also relies on a separate framework just like VB.NET.)
2. It wouldn't do you, feras, any good.

So instead I'll post a few links that can, hopefully, answer your questions.
VB vs VB.NET
http://www.sqlmag.com/Article/ArticleID/21050/sql_server_21050.html

ASP vs ASP.NET
http://www.w3schools.com/aspnet/aspnet_vsasp.asp

C++ vs. C
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C%2B%2B Quote from: feras on July 01, 2009, 12:21:43 PM

Hi every body

what is the different between
1- VB and VB.net
2- asp and asp.net
3- c++ and c

Thank you

Do your own homework.VB6 (often referred to as VB classic) as stated uses it's own run-time objects & procedures. MS decided with the first installment of .NET to completely revamp the language- get rid of all that silly stuff from the old, MS-DOS BASIC's.

Visual Basic .NET is a good language, in my opinion, it isn't really Visual Basic anymore- it's close, but it feels different. It is, however, a great language in and of itself.

Personally, I do most of my development in VB6; I barely touch .NET at the current time. It doesn't suck, though- it's just different. Some people resist change fiercely )

I am a Linux person, so it is hard for me to say that anything Microsoft is good. But I think that VB6 was one of the better things they made.

pragma
I know that both VB and VB.NET rely on a framework to operate. I think the VB framework is better than .NET because it is SMALLER and faster. I also have heard that Microsoft created .NET to make programs harder to port to other operating systems. Quote from: Linux711 on July 05, 2009, 10:29:30 PM

I am a Linux person, so it is hard for me to say that anything Microsoft is good. But I think that VB6 was one of the better things they made.

pragma
I know that both VB and VB.NET rely on a framework to operate. I think the VB framework is better than .NET because it is smaller and faster. I also have heard that Microsoft created .NET to make programs harder to port to other operating systems.

And VB6 is easier ()

Quote from: Linux711 on July 05, 2009, 10:29:30 PM

pragma
I know that both VB and VB.NET rely on a framework to operate. I think the VB framework is better than .NET because it is smaller and faster. I also have heard that Microsoft created .NET to make programs harder to port to other operating systems.

Yeah that's right. They spent millions of dollars and thousands of man hours just to spite the Linux community, because Microsoft is super villain evil. Right now Bill Gates is laughing his *censored* of in his fortress of doom.

I really hate having to be the one defending Microsoft here, because I'm really not that big of a fan. They have done plenty of things wrong, but lets at least get the facts straight.

The truth is that Microsoft created the .NET framework to make it easier and faster to develop software for the Windows platform, and perhaps most importantly, make it easier to port software between different Windows platforms.
Is software that relies on .NET harder to port to another platform? No not really, .NET code is compiled to byte code, just like Java. In theory this can be execute on any platform with a .NET virtual machine, again just like Java.

It is not an evil scheme, just good business sense, to only support it on their own platforms. Microsoft have no interest in creating another Java. But Microsoft have done absolutely nothing to stop other people from PORTING the .NET framework. Ever heard of Mono? In fact Microsoft is indirectly sponsoring Mono through their partnership with Novell. IMO it would be easier to port a .NET APPLICATION then it would a application made with VB6... So that whole "They did it to make it harder to port" nonsense doesn't really work. VB6 compiles to either P-Code or Machine code; either way, it always outputs a windows executable. .NET programs compile, as pragma said, to bytecode.

All that's needed is a CLR for the other OS's- and given the fact that WINE essentially duplicates the windows API itself I don't see the task of creating a CLR for Linux or mac as too difficult for the Linux people.

Solve : .net?

Discussion

No Comment Found

Related InterviewSolutions

Reply to Comment