What does it do?

[sbdi]

I know .Net is going to be some new open source language writtin in C#? Which is more like Java etc.

But what exactly will ASP.Net / VB.Net be capable of doing that no other scripting language can do at the moment. Are there any other .Net languages as well?

[Umair.ms]

.NET would allow event-driven programming even in web applications (if i am not taking it wrong). And it feels as if C# would be a natural choice for ASP.NET (just as VBScript was for classical ASP).

C# is some kind of a blend of VB, C++ and Java. I am not sure whether C# would be powerful enough for developing commercial applications.

To get an idea bout ASP.NET, see this:
http://www.dotnet247.com/247reference/guide/14.aspx

You can use server side controls. These controls can be DHTML-based controls on IE, simple HTML controls on non-IE and equivalents on Mobile phones.

[Kevin Yank]

Here's a recent editorial from the Tech Times that addresses the question of 'what is it?':

MICROSOFT .NET, JAVA AND YOU

As if the waters surrounding Microsoft's upcoming .NET platform weren't muddy enough, Microsoft's launch of Visual J# .NET (also known under the unofficial codename Java.NET) Beta 1 is set to add to the confusion. When you look beyond the marketing hype, however, the motivation behind this new Java syntax support is just as confusing.

First of all, if you're anything less than an ardent supporter of Microsoft development tools, you could be forgiven for asking a common question: 'What is .NET?' In short, .NET is Microsoft's new platform for Windows and Web application development. .NET is a big collection of Microsoft server software and development tools that have all been designed to work together. The idea is to make things easier for today's developers who face increasing demands to produce products that go beyond the bounds of traditional software development.

At the heart of .NET is the Common Language Runtime (CLR). All .NET programs (be they Windows applications or Web pages written in ASP.NET) are compiled ahead of time into Microsoft Intermediate Language (MSIL) files. From the point of view of a Windows user, these files look and behave just like Windows .EXE and .DLL files; however, instead of being written in machine code suitable for native execution in Windows, .NET programs use a set of instructions that are understood by the .NET CLR. The CLR sits on top of whatever operating system the user happens to use and translates MSIL into native instructions that are understood by the operating system.

Anyone who has done any Java development before will find that this all sounds eerily familiar. Java programs are compiled into Java bytecode, and are then run on a Java Virtual Machine (JVM) that converts the bytecode into native operating system instructions. This design choice was made to allow Java to be a platform-independant language. In fact, any operating system for which there exists a JVM can run Java programs with no need for recompilation or porting of any kind! So naturally the first question that springs to mind about .NET, which uses the very same design pattern, is this: will .NET be a way to write Windows applications that run on multiple platforms, maybe even on Linux and MacOS X? Microsoft themselves are developing a CLR for the FreeBSD operating system, while Open Source initiatives are already underway to develop a version of the .NET platform for Linux.

Not so fast: .NET is more than just the CLR. .NET also includes the ".NET Framework", a vast collection of class libraries that include the software components neccessary for writing graphical Windows applications, for creating dynamic Web sites with ASP.NET, and for accessing relational databases with ADO.NET, among other things. None of these class libraries will be officially available on any platform except Windows, and with non-Windows incarnations of previous Microsoft-only APIs (such as ASP 3.0 and ADO 2.5) having only just recently become practical, we can expect it will be quite some time before we see any truly useful, platform-independant applications of .NET.

So if Microsoft didn't create the CLR to make .NET multiplatform, what's the point? One of the main features of .NET is the fact that developers have a range of programming languages to choose from. Web developers coming from ASP are likely to be most comfortable with VBScript, and .NET lets them write programs in VB.NET, a very similar (yet much more robust) language. Developers coming from more traditional software development backgrounds, who are likely to have experience with C++ and Java are offered C#. Pronounced 'C Sharp', this brand new language looks a lot like Java, but with a sprinkling of altered keywords and new syntax to help make C++ developers feel more at home.

So what does the newly-announced J# Beta have to do with all this? Well as a seasoned Java developer exploring C# for the first time, I found the differences between the two languages to be more annoying than anything else. Everything that C# can do as a pure language Java can do just as well, often with less typing. We programmers are usually quite set in our ways; Microsoft seems to have recognized that, and created J#.

J# ('J Sharp') takes all of the pure language syntax of Java (classes, interfaces, methods, if statements, for loops, try-catch blocks), and applies them to the .NET platform. Instead of using the javax.swing.JFrame class to create a Window, you use the .NET equivalent. Basically, J# is Java with all of the classes stripped out and replaced with the .NET Framework, including ASP.NET, ADO.NET, and the rest.

-> Microsoft Visual J# .NET Beta 1
http://msdn.microsoft.com/visualj/jsharp/beta.asp

Readers with sharp memories (no pun intended) will recall that this is not the first attempt Microsoft has made at commandeering the syntax of the Java language and applying it to its own proprietary API. Microsoft Visual J++, which was confused by many early adopters of Java as just another Java development environment, contained a mix of traditional Java APIs and Microsoft Windows-specific APIs. The courts ended up barring Microsoft from pursuing the development of J++ because it infringed on Sun's right to safeguard the purity of the core Java class libraries.

J++ was a big flop in its time, but it seems that with .NET Microsoft think the timing is right to try again. This time, however, the stakes are higher. Java is no longer an over-hyped language for writing Web applets. Today, Java is the leading platform for enterprise Web applications. If Microsoft can successfully lure developers away from the Java platform by disguising .NET with the trappings of the Java language, they'll have succeeded in doing an end run around Sun's lawyers, who may not be able to protect 'Java the language' with the same success as they were able to protect 'Java the platform'.

Until next issue!

- Kevin Yank
Editor, The SitePoint Tech Times
mailto:techitmes@sitepoint.com

[Kevin Yank]

Originally posted by Umair.ms
.NET would allow event-driven programming even in web applications (if i am not taking it wrong). And it feels as if C# would be a natural choice for ASP.NET (just as VBScript was for classical ASP).

Actually in the reading I've done on .NET and ASP.NET, I've found that VB.NET and C# will be pretty much equally suitable both to application and server-side Web development. It's just a question of which syntax you prefer. If you're coming from a C/C++ or Java background, C# will be the most comfortable to you. Visual Basic developers and ASP 3.0 developers who worked in VBScript will be more likely to gravitate towards VB.NET.

C# is some kind of a blend of VB, C++ and Java. I am not sure whether C# would be powerful enough for developing commercial applications.

Syntax-wise, C# is much closer to Java than any other language, but it bears a few C++ roots as well. It basically has all the language elements of Java, but adds a few little extras like event handlers (which in Java were normally implemented with collections of objects, which is functionally equivalent but requires a little more typing) and grouped accessor methods (the getProperty and setProperty methods for an encapsulated class member are grouped together in C# syntax, which encourages good OO design and can also save a little typing).

C# as a language is more than suitable for developing commercial applications. The question is how much of a performance hit apps will take running under the .NET Common Language Runtime (CLR). In my opinion we'll see business apps for Windows developed in C# before long, but high-performance programs like games are still quite a ways off.

You can use server side controls. These controls can be DHTML-based controls on IE, simple HTML controls on non-IE and equivalents on Mobile phones.

You're talking about ASP.NET now, not .NET. These features are indeed exciting and convenient, but keep in mind that they've been available in for some time JSP and in Cold Fusion before it.

[HarryF]

So what we're saying is .NET more of a concept or perhaps a standard, with no single language or function.

Microsoft are appealing to all developers (well C / Java / VB at least) to use it with the incentive that this will be the technology you can do everything in.

And where Java failed as the ideal mechanism for delivering applications to all operating systems, Microsoft hopes to succeed.

Wonder how long it will take for them to release Office.NET, which you download with your browser each time you start it and pay per minute of use?

"Do you hear that, Mr. Anderson? That is the sound of inevitability."

[Kevin Yank]

Originally posted by HarryF
And where Java failed as the ideal mechanism for delivering applications to all operating systems, Microsoft hopes to succeed.

Not exactly. Rather, Microsoft intends to make the .NET platform do everything Java can do, but for Windows OSes only. The next Server version of Windows will not be called Windows XP Server; rather, it'll be Windows .NET Server. The potential platform independance of .NET will, I suspect, never be truly realized.

Wonder how long it will take for them to release Office.NET, which you download with your browser each time you start it and pay per minute of use?

Office.NET is, I believe, scheduled for release in 2003.

[dominique]

Originally posted by HarryF
Wonder how long it will take for them to release Office.NET, which you download with your browser each time you start it and pay per minute of use?

Is that a joke, or will Office.NET really work that way? I find it hard to believe that we are already at that level of technology (widespread broadband).

"Do you hear that, Mr. Anderson? That is the sound of inevitability."

"You can't scare me with this Gestapo crap. I know my rights. I want my phone call."

[Umair.ms]

How would I ever download a software on a dial-up???

Now what's that
http://www.personable.com/products/s....asp?sw_id=238

[Kevin Yank]

They use a virtual desktop system -- the software is not run on your computer, so you don't have to download it.

Personable.com is the only application service provider (ASP) to deliver a fully functional Windows 2000 virtual desktop to the browser to help companies source a full array of software on-demand and managed desktop services. Personable.com's instant software solution includes provisioning of users; subscription to applications; availability of a virtual private network; access to software and files from any PC or Macintosh connected to the Internet; and real-time billing information online.

[HarryF]

Is that a joke, or will Office.NET really work that way? I find it hard to believe that we are already at that level of technology (widespread broadband).

It's getting close. Sure alot of people connect to the Internet using dial up still but in the UK, for example, there's now a single cable company capable delivering 500mbps ASDL to 70% of the population (NTL).

Guess Microsoft will begin with versions of Office.NET they sell as a server app for companies and bide their time until high speed access becomes widespread.

If we want really apocalyptic stuff, remember this SciFi book I read ages ago, Farewell Horizontal. Was written just before the Internet really took off. Generally it's pretty trashy stuff (but short if you feel like reading it). The interesting part was the authors vision of the future of information: in the hands of two or three big companies and you pay for everything. For example you want to search for information - the accuracy of the results depends on how much you paid. Chilling stuff

Ah - don't you just love Monday morning!

[Umair.ms]

So --- Personable.com (and there are few other ASP like this one) have started what Microsoft will be introducing itself with Office .NET. Hmmmmmmm.....

[HarryF]

So you're saying "Buy. Buy!"?

[pedershk]

Microsoft touts .Net as "Software as a service" - which you can interpret pretty much any way you want, I guess

The idea behind the *.Net Framework* , which is the SDK part of the .Net paradigm, is that you can write code in pretty much any language you like. Be that C#, VB.Net, Perl, PHP, Java or J#. Even Cobol is supported out of the box.

I know Activestate, for instance, is currently working on porting ActivePerl (their semi-commercial Win32/Unix version of Perl) to the .Net architecture. Php4Win.de is also touting a version of PHP called PHP.Net, although this seems to be in the very early stages.

There IS however, a current, Microsoft-Only (i.e. Windows), thingy that's called ASP.Net. This is essentially a collection of so-called "tag libraries", not unbeknown to JSP developers of current.

For example <asp:LinkButton />, which has a TON of extra functionality. These are essentially embedded as tag classes inside HTML files (although you can separate them as user controls if you wish, thus separating even this code from the content (i.e. pure HTML)).

Then there's the concept of the code-behind pages, which are the parts that can be written in any language you like, although ofcourse Microsoft would prefer them to be written in C# or VB.Net.

C# essentially looks a lot like Java, and VB.Net is Visual Basic "On Objects", so to speak.

You can also develop full-fledged Win32 applications, and there are several APIs in the .Net Framework SDK that cover this part, such as Windows Forms (the Win32 Equivalent of the Web Forms API, also in the same .Net Framework SDK), and ADO.Net, which is the data access layer in .Net.

Then, ofcourse, there's the most current source of ultrahype, Web Services. This is actually a standard also supported by Oracle & IBM, and more are probably on the way. Essentially you expose parts of your application (or the whole enchilada, if you so desire) as Services that are accessible over the web via the HTTP protocol. The .Net framework supports Web Services that can be accessed either via SOAP, HTTP GET or HTTP POST. The beauty of this approach ofcourse, is that you can access the application from pretty much any environment, using ANY web browser, or ANY application that supports SOAP.

Win32 applications written with the .Net framework, for example, can access Web Services "out of the box". You can then change all the "code-behind" stuff of your Web Services, without needing to change the front-end application stuff (including Web Applications and Win32 Applications). You essentially totally separate the Business Logic and the Data Access tier from the client part, and you're free to put the client part on any server or client, anywhere in the world.

There's supposedly a large market emerging with Web Services "for sale", such as stock market quotes, airplane reservation systems etc. etc. These can then be bought and "consumed" by application developers who need to interface with these systems. As long as the parameters and method names don't change, the web service supplier can essentially completely replace his infrastructure without the end user ever knowing about it.

For example, you can say goodbye to needing to install the Net8 client to access an oracle database of some accounting system, since this accounting system uses your local web server as its .Net Web services hosting point, and THAT web server has Net8. You, as a client, however, only need to be able to access the server over HTTP. The client application, be that a Web Client or a Win32 client or something else (a Gnome client on Linux? Sure - look here!) - talks over HTTP with a public web service on that server.

There's ofcourse tons more to say about .Net, such as inherent authentication support for web Forms, Passport, cleartext etc - also accessible through Web Services etc. etc.

Essentially - go to MSDN and read till you weep. Microsoft is going to rule the world with this stuff.

Oh - and the .Net framework is free. Visual Studio.Net, which is Microsofts editor/IDE system for the environment, is absolutely NOT free. However, you can use Editplus, Emacs, Notepad or whatever 3rd party editor you like. Visual Studio.Net is great, but not a necessity.