Programming C, C++, Java, PHP, Ruby, Turing, VB
Computer Science Canada 
Programming C, C++, Java, PHP, Ruby, Turing, VB  

Username:   Password: 
 RegisterRegister   
 All this worthless .NET sutff (c#.net,VB.net,etc)
Index -> General Programming
Goto page 1, 2  Next
View previous topic Printable versionDownload TopicSubscribe to this topicPrivate MessagesRefresh page View next topic
Author Message
syntax0r




PostPosted: Sun Apr 24, 2005 11:12 pm   Post subject: All this worthless .NET sutff (c#.net,VB.net,etc)

I am quite new to programming, so I am not sure what this .NET stuff is by Microsoft.

I am confused, and I'm wondering if a human (not a search engine, as its results don't answer me) could respond, allowing me to understand some of my queries.


I did a little of Turing, Visual VB 6 and now Visual C#.

I noticed that VB 6 is different from VB.NET. The HORRIBLE thing is that VB.NET (successor to VB 6) will compile .EXEs that don't work on many computers as of now. I am not sure why, but I assume it's something to do with this .NET stuff, which requires all of us to have it installed for any VB.NET compiled .EXE to work.

Now, WHAT is the point of making programs that only you and a few other people (comparatively) can execute?

I made a simple "Hello World" program from VB.Net (Express 2005 Beta 2 Edition, I believe), and it won't work on all of my friends' computers.

That sucks.

So I just gave up on VB.NEt and went to the "good ol'" Visual Basic 6. I made a few programs, and all of them worked Very Happy!!!

Well sadly enough, I've heard VB 6 is "DEAD."

That sucks.


So I kind of gave up VB 6 (I still like it due to easiness and compatibility w/ all Win XX OSes), and went to C# (supposedly the "improved" version of C++.

Well, guess what? None of the programs I created work on my friends' computer as well.

That sucks.


So, I comes down to this:

-Stick with the old VB 6

-Find a way VB.NET and C#.NET compiled programs to work on most computers.

Seriously, this failure to execute .NET compiled programs is really discouraging from learning C#, which I seem to like.

So, is there a solution to all this mess?
Sponsor
Sponsor
Sponsor
sponsor
Martin




PostPosted: Mon Apr 25, 2005 12:06 am   Post subject: (No subject)

To use .NET, you are going to have to build a distributable version of your application, or run your application on a computer which also has the .NET framework installed.

Google.
wtd




PostPosted: Mon Apr 25, 2005 12:18 am   Post subject: (No subject)

Look at this way... that's a minor obstacle, and once you figure it out, you're good to go from then on. The crap that comes with VB6 and the Win32 API or MFC... that's a much bigger obstacle, and one far less easily overcome.
syntax0r




PostPosted: Mon Apr 25, 2005 6:13 am   Post subject: (No subject)

Then I don't see the point in writing programs that basically only the programmer and a few other tech-savvy Windows XP updaters can run.

Perhaps moving towards Visual C++ or sticking with VB6 will make my dedicated learning time useful for the sake of writing programs that at least function on ppl's computers.

Btw, how big is this .NET update.
Martin




PostPosted: Mon Apr 25, 2005 6:56 am   Post subject: (No subject)

There's a way to package your release build so that it has the required .NET packages attached, and you'll be able to run it on anyone's computer.

Sticking with Visual Basic 6 would be useless, as Microsoft has shuddered and forgotten all about it already. Trust me, .NET is definately worth it.
Tony




PostPosted: Mon Apr 25, 2005 10:21 am   Post subject: (No subject)

similarly people need a JVM to run Java applets Wink

Many languages require the client to have some sort of a framework installed on their end. People are slow to get .Net because it's new, but if you're into Windows platform development, this is certanly the way to go.

Just wait until Longhorn ships out -- it will come with .Net framework. Then you'll be ahead of the game since you have so much more experience since now to whatever.
Martin




PostPosted: Mon Apr 25, 2005 10:23 am   Post subject: (No subject)

.NET is definately where the future is, and is one of the best ideas that Microsoft has had in a while.
Tony




PostPosted: Mon Apr 25, 2005 10:28 am   Post subject: (No subject)

Martin wrote:
.NET is definately where the future is

well... for the Windows OS at least. Doesn't run on *nix Wink It's going to be interesting to see how this ends up.

University of Waterloo is switching over to .Net.. so we'll ether be quite ahead over others if .Net catches on, or get fucked over if it doesn't. Hmm... actually I hear that I'll be using C this next term. Damn it, although it's more applicable to my program.
Sponsor
Sponsor
Sponsor
sponsor
Martin




PostPosted: Mon Apr 25, 2005 10:39 am   Post subject: (No subject)

C is an awesome language. You'll love it.
wtd




PostPosted: Mon Apr 25, 2005 11:39 am   Post subject: (No subject)

Martin wrote:
C is an awesome language. You'll love it.


Yeah, gotta love the lack of coherent string handling and the inability to have reusable type-safe containers.

Not to mention the buffer overflows. What's not to love?
wtd




PostPosted: Mon Apr 25, 2005 11:53 am   Post subject: (No subject)

Tony wrote:
Martin wrote:
.NET is definately where the future is

well... for the Windows OS at least. Doesn't run on *nix Wink It's going to be interesting to see how this ends up.


Really? Tell that to my GTK# tic-tac-toe game running on Ubuntu.

Posted Image, might have been reduced in size. Click Image to view fullscreen.

Posted Image, might have been reduced in size. Click Image to view fullscreen.

Posted Image, might have been reduced in size. Click Image to view fullscreen.
md




PostPosted: Mon Apr 25, 2005 11:58 am   Post subject: (No subject)

Tony wrote:
Martin wrote:
.NET is definately where the future is

well... for the Windows OS at least. Doesn't run on *nix Wink It's going to be interesting to see how this ends up.

University of Waterloo is switching over to .Net.. so we'll ether be quite ahead over others if .Net catches on, or get ****ed over if it doesn't. Hmm... actually I hear that I'll be using C this next term. Damn it, although it's more applicable to my program.


Er... it actually does run on linux...

And as for only a select few being able to run it, it could be that your friends are just a little slow with updating their machinces because the .Net framework has been availabe through windows update for about a year and a half at least, and most people now have it.
Martin




PostPosted: Mon Apr 25, 2005 11:59 am   Post subject: (No subject)

wtd wrote:
Martin wrote:
C is an awesome language. You'll love it.


Yeah, gotta love the lack of coherent string handling and the inability to have reusable type-safe containers.

Not to mention the buffer overflows. What's not to love?


Exactly. (That wasn't a sarcastic comment) Very Happy
Tony




PostPosted: Mon Apr 25, 2005 12:42 pm   Post subject: (No subject)

hmm, wasn't aware of .Net running on *nix... interesting Thinking score!

anyways, in C I'll just be writing low level access functions to make physical hardware move. I'll be interfacing everything though Ruby Wink
Martin




PostPosted: Mon Apr 25, 2005 12:44 pm   Post subject: (No subject)

Tony wrote:
hmm, wasn't aware of .Net running on *nix... interesting Thinking score!

anyways, in C I'll just be writing low level access functions to make physical hardware move. I'll be interfacing everything though Ruby Wink


Read as: anyways, in C I'll just be asking martin to help me in writing low level access functions to make physical hardware move.
Display posts from previous:   
   Index -> General Programming
View previous topic Tell A FriendPrintable versionDownload TopicSubscribe to this topicPrivate MessagesRefresh page View next topic

Page 1 of 2  [ 19 Posts ]
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Jump to:   


Style:  
Search: