473,289 Members | 2,106 Online
Bytes | Software Development & Data Engineering Community
Post Job

Home Posts Topics Members FAQ

Join Bytes to post your question to a community of 473,289 software developers and data experts.

Is ASP.NET really as good as they claim? (No, this isn't a troll, please read)

Hello,

This is NOT a troll, it's a genuine question. Please read right
through to see why.

I have been using Vusual Basic and Classic ASP for some years, and
have now started looking at ASP.NET. At first glance, it looks
excellent, albeit nothing that couldn't have been done to Classic ASP.
I have been through a few tutorials and was impressed with how quickly
you can get database info onto a page.

What worries me is if it really is as good as it looks. Some years
ago, MS tried to persuade VB programmers to get into writing web sites
by introducing Web Classes to VB. These looked, at first glance, like
a really quick and easy way to code a web site. The universal opinion
on them was that they were awful when you tried to get anything real
done with them. You spent so much time fighting with the system that
you would have been quicker doing it by hand in the first place.

Same thing happened when MS introduced the Data Environment into VB.
Again, this was supposed to be a RAD tool for getting database-based
apps up quickly. The first impressions were very favourable, but you
quickly found yourself writing more code to fight the system than you
would have done by doing it all by hand in the first place.

There are other examples, but I think the point is clear. That which
appears to be a fantastic way to code initially may turn out to be a
coding nightmare when you try and take the second steps.

So, is ASP.NET the same, or have MS finally got it right? My first
impression is that is it great and could save a lot of time. Trouble
is, I can almost feel myself going back a few years to when I first
tried the Data Environment. That's what worries me, am I going to
start with it and then find it's more bother than it's worth?

Do people do professional sites in ASP.NET and still think it's good?
Maybe this is the wrong place to ask as anyone who hated it and gave
up probably wouldn't be reading here, but I would still like some
reassurance that my time is going to be invested well if I learn
ASP.NET. Given my extensive code library, built up over a number of
years, I can get db-driven web sites up in Classic ASP quite quickly.
I'm not going to drop that unless I know the alternative is a genuine
improvement.

As I said at the start, this is a genuine question, not a troll.
Please reply appropriately. TIA
Nov 19 '05
59 4890
mrmac presents two browser related issues: client-side validation and HTML
formatting that differs. Both can be addressed.

1. Client-side validation.
Microsoft made a decision to create their client-side validation code
according to their DHTML standard, used by IE and IE/Mac but not Mozilla
(which follows the W3C standard).
Microsoft in general has not made the most feature rich web controls. There
are many reasons for it:
- They have a very large variety of classes and technologies to build. So
they deliver usable a TextBox control without neat features like using
javascript to filter out unwanted keystrokes. In ASP.NET 2.0, they are
introducing many new web controls with some good features although still,
users will find limitations in them.
- They have built this system using OOP technology. Its designed for
expansion. (Javascript on the other hand is not really OOP and their
client-side validation code is not expandable without directly editing their
scripts.)
- They know that third parties will fill in the gaps (provide an enhanced
textbox with filtering keystrokes - I do this in my Professional Validation
And More product).
I am a third party control developer. I have built a significantly better
validator system for ASP.NET, "Professional Validation And More"
(http://www.peterblum.com/vam/home.aspx). It has 22 validators that support
IE, IE/Mac, Mozilla, FireFox, Netscape7, Opera 7 and Safari. It has a lot of
new features people ask for that Microsoft isn't delivering (because of the
reasons I listed above).

2. Formatting is incorrect.
ASP.NET has a system called "BrowserCapabilities" that describes the
featureset of each browser. The issue is that Microsoft did not define
BrowserCapabilities for all of the modern browsers. (You will find them in
machine.config.) Its up to you to define them. However, there is a very
quick way to make all browsers use the same HTML. Set <@ Page
clientTarget="upLevel" >.

--- Peter Blum
www.PeterBlum.com
Email: PL****@PeterBlum.com
Creator of "Professional Validation And More" at
http://www.peterblum.com/vam/home.aspx

"ARt" <AR*@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:CB**********************************@microsof t.com...
I think the reason the validator controls don't work in all browsers the
same
way is because the validators generate client-side javascript to do what
you
ask of the control. As with all clientside javascript you need to test
with
all the browsers you plan to support. This is not necessarily an asp.net
issue.

"mrmac" wrote:
Actually, most controls are handled well across browsers. Where I've had
problems is in Safari mostly. (I work in education and those people
really
like macs.) But we have found that some things that work great in IE need
some help in other browsers. Example: Validators sometimes are not
fired in
all browsers as you tab thru controls because of how javascript is
generated,
so it is important to use the "CausesValidation="true"" attribute for
submit
buttons. Also, text boxes are displayed fine in IE when a width
attribute
is specified, but in firefox you also need to specify the columns
attribute.
So maybe I'm a bit picky on this, but probably all this means is to test
your
ASP.net pages in multiple browsers. In summary, all the asp.net controls
work, but not all asp.net controls work "as advertised" in other
browsers.

Nov 19 '05 #51
Jon
I have had problems with the cross browser rendering of pages, especially
when using a panel control. Seems that Net tries to render tables rather then
divisons for layout on most browsers besides IE. Makes a big mess sometimes.
The siszing for text boxes is also not rendered correctly on NS, and other
things. Nothing really hard to fix, like with ASP Classic.

"Alan Silver" wrote:
Alan,
Your article mentions a comparison between asp and asp.net. Regarding that,
I'd count it as a vast improvement. My top 2 reasons are more valid error
trapping, and validators. Those two things alone, would make a change to
asp.net valid. On the cautious side, browser compatability can be hard to
maintain for some controls and we choose not to implement them.


Such as what? All that I've read said that browser capabilities were
carefully handled by the ASP.NET system. It sounded too good to be true,
but I hadn't seen anyone discuss it more.

--
Alan Silver
(anything added below this line is nothing to do with me)

Nov 19 '05 #52
Alan,

I'm repeating what many have said but want to add my two cents.

I'm on my third ASP.NET project and find it far superior to the old ASP
methods. I have the following cautions however:

1) On two of my projects I have worked with people making the transistion
from VB to VB.NET and found that they would have been better off going to C#.
The reason is that they continually think of it as a structured language and
ignore the OO which they would have, most likely, learned by changing the
language.

2) Do not limit yourself to ASP.NET since another very key factor is the
ADO.NET. This has been as great a boon to the development as the ASP.NET.

3) Be careful of the RAD attitude. I have often found people thinking that
a RAD application is a deliverable. This really is not the case but does
provide a starting point for proof of concept and direction of development.
As an example RAD can deliver a page with data bound controls but in many
cases the true development would require new controls to be developed along
with a Bussiness/Data Layer.....Both of which are usual ignored in the RAD.

Bottom line is that this is a great improvement as long as the developer is
interested in learning and stays focused on the long term not just the short
term. At this time I would have trouble going back to the old ASP .

"Alan Silver" wrote:
Hello,

This is NOT a troll, it's a genuine question. Please read right
through to see why.

I have been using Vusual Basic and Classic ASP for some years, and
have now started looking at ASP.NET. At first glance, it looks
excellent, albeit nothing that couldn't have been done to Classic ASP.
I have been through a few tutorials and was impressed with how quickly
you can get database info onto a page.

What worries me is if it really is as good as it looks. Some years
ago, MS tried to persuade VB programmers to get into writing web sites
by introducing Web Classes to VB. These looked, at first glance, like
a really quick and easy way to code a web site. The universal opinion
on them was that they were awful when you tried to get anything real
done with them. You spent so much time fighting with the system that
you would have been quicker doing it by hand in the first place.

Same thing happened when MS introduced the Data Environment into VB.
Again, this was supposed to be a RAD tool for getting database-based
apps up quickly. The first impressions were very favourable, but you
quickly found yourself writing more code to fight the system than you
would have done by doing it all by hand in the first place.

There are other examples, but I think the point is clear. That which
appears to be a fantastic way to code initially may turn out to be a
coding nightmare when you try and take the second steps.

So, is ASP.NET the same, or have MS finally got it right? My first
impression is that is it great and could save a lot of time. Trouble
is, I can almost feel myself going back a few years to when I first
tried the Data Environment. That's what worries me, am I going to
start with it and then find it's more bother than it's worth?

Do people do professional sites in ASP.NET and still think it's good?
Maybe this is the wrong place to ask as anyone who hated it and gave
up probably wouldn't be reading here, but I would still like some
reassurance that my time is going to be invested well if I learn
ASP.NET. Given my extensive code library, built up over a number of
years, I can get db-driven web sites up in Classic ASP quite quickly.
I'm not going to drop that unless I know the alternative is a genuine
improvement.

As I said at the start, this is a genuine question, not a troll.
Please reply appropriately. TIA

Nov 19 '05 #53
>Alan,

I'm repeating what many have said but want to add my two cents.
They are welcome, see comments below ...
I'm on my third ASP.NET project and find it far superior to the old ASP
methods. I have the following cautions however:

1) On two of my projects I have worked with people making the transistion
from VB to VB.NET and found that they would have been better off going to C#.
The reason is that they continually think of it as a structured language and
ignore the OO which they would have, most likely, learned by changing the
language.
I have already decided to go with C# for a few reasons, one of which is
this very one. Another is that I did some Java a few years ago and liked
it, and seeing as C# is a Java-clone, it looks attractive. Also, since
MS use C# internally, I have more confidence that they will stick with
it. Along with many other VB developers, I was pretty disgusted with the
way MS dumped us with the move to .NET. I don't want to let that happen
again.
2) Do not limit yourself to ASP.NET since another very key factor is the
ADO.NET. This has been as great a boon to the development as the ASP.NET.
Not sure exactly what you mean here, probably 'cos I've not really got
far enough into the database side of things to see the best way to go
about it. It's a bit frustrating because that is the most important part
in many ways, but you need to learn the basics first.

Could you show some examples of what you mean? Short code snippets maybe
showing the ADO.NET way and the other. That would help me understand.
3) Be careful of the RAD attitude. I have often found people thinking that
a RAD application is a deliverable. This really is not the case but does
provide a starting point for proof of concept and direction of development.
As an example RAD can deliver a page with data bound controls but in many
cases the true development would require new controls to be developed along
with a Bussiness/Data Layer.....Both of which are usual ignored in the RAD.
Ah, this was exactly the purpose of my original question. I have seen
several RAD tools introduced and they ended up being more work than
coding by hand. I was mainly interested in seeing if people really do
stick with them when they get past the beginner stage and get into real
site production. You confirm my suspicions that hand-rolled is probably
better.
Bottom line is that this is a great improvement as long as the developer is
interested in learning and stays focused on the long term not just the short
term. At this time I would have trouble going back to the old ASP .
I am interested in learning, and I want to learn good solid practices
from the start. I have no interest in RAD tools if they aren't up to the
serious work. I'm not doing this as a hobby, it's my living. I want to
get it right from the start.

Thanks for the reply, it's been very interesting. If you could supply
some sample code to show what you mean about ADO.NET it would be even
better ;-)

ta ra

alan
"Alan Silver" wrote:
Hello,

This is NOT a troll, it's a genuine question. Please read right
through to see why.

I have been using Vusual Basic and Classic ASP for some years, and
have now started looking at ASP.NET. At first glance, it looks
excellent, albeit nothing that couldn't have been done to Classic ASP.
I have been through a few tutorials and was impressed with how quickly
you can get database info onto a page.

What worries me is if it really is as good as it looks. Some years
ago, MS tried to persuade VB programmers to get into writing web sites
by introducing Web Classes to VB. These looked, at first glance, like
a really quick and easy way to code a web site. The universal opinion
on them was that they were awful when you tried to get anything real
done with them. You spent so much time fighting with the system that
you would have been quicker doing it by hand in the first place.

Same thing happened when MS introduced the Data Environment into VB.
Again, this was supposed to be a RAD tool for getting database-based
apps up quickly. The first impressions were very favourable, but you
quickly found yourself writing more code to fight the system than you
would have done by doing it all by hand in the first place.

There are other examples, but I think the point is clear. That which
appears to be a fantastic way to code initially may turn out to be a
coding nightmare when you try and take the second steps.

So, is ASP.NET the same, or have MS finally got it right? My first
impression is that is it great and could save a lot of time. Trouble
is, I can almost feel myself going back a few years to when I first
tried the Data Environment. That's what worries me, am I going to
start with it and then find it's more bother than it's worth?

Do people do professional sites in ASP.NET and still think it's good?
Maybe this is the wrong place to ask as anyone who hated it and gave
up probably wouldn't be reading here, but I would still like some
reassurance that my time is going to be invested well if I learn
ASP.NET. Given my extensive code library, built up over a number of
years, I can get db-driven web sites up in Classic ASP quite quickly.
I'm not going to drop that unless I know the alternative is a genuine
improvement.

As I said at the start, this is a genuine question, not a troll.
Please reply appropriately. TIA


--
Alan Silver
(anything added below this line is nothing to do with me)
Nov 19 '05 #54
> it, and seeing as C# is a Java-clone, it looks attractive. Also, since

Exsqueeze me? Java's syntax was developed AFTER C and C++, and was designed
to look like C. NOT the other way around.

If you want to use C#, it would behoove you to know at least C, unless you
just want to be a VB developer who uses a different syntax. Unfortunately,
there are quite a few of them out there now. Learning C will also make you a
much more powerful developer overall.

--
HTH,

Kevin Spencer
Microsoft MVP
..Net Developer
Neither a follower nor a lender be.

"Alan Silver" <al*********@nospam.thanx> wrote in message
news:ym**************@nospamthankyou.spam...
Alan,

I'm repeating what many have said but want to add my two cents.


They are welcome, see comments below ...
I'm on my third ASP.NET project and find it far superior to the old ASP
methods. I have the following cautions however:

1) On two of my projects I have worked with people making the transistion
from VB to VB.NET and found that they would have been better off going to
C#.
The reason is that they continually think of it as a structured language
and
ignore the OO which they would have, most likely, learned by changing the
language.


I have already decided to go with C# for a few reasons, one of which is
this very one. Another is that I did some Java a few years ago and liked
it, and seeing as C# is a Java-clone, it looks attractive. Also, since MS
use C# internally, I have more confidence that they will stick with it.
Along with many other VB developers, I was pretty disgusted with the way
MS dumped us with the move to .NET. I don't want to let that happen again.
2) Do not limit yourself to ASP.NET since another very key factor is the
ADO.NET. This has been as great a boon to the development as the ASP.NET.


Not sure exactly what you mean here, probably 'cos I've not really got far
enough into the database side of things to see the best way to go about
it. It's a bit frustrating because that is the most important part in many
ways, but you need to learn the basics first.

Could you show some examples of what you mean? Short code snippets maybe
showing the ADO.NET way and the other. That would help me understand.
3) Be careful of the RAD attitude. I have often found people thinking
that
a RAD application is a deliverable. This really is not the case but does
provide a starting point for proof of concept and direction of
development.
As an example RAD can deliver a page with data bound controls but in many
cases the true development would require new controls to be developed
along
with a Bussiness/Data Layer.....Both of which are usual ignored in the
RAD.


Ah, this was exactly the purpose of my original question. I have seen
several RAD tools introduced and they ended up being more work than coding
by hand. I was mainly interested in seeing if people really do stick with
them when they get past the beginner stage and get into real site
production. You confirm my suspicions that hand-rolled is probably better.
Bottom line is that this is a great improvement as long as the developer
is
interested in learning and stays focused on the long term not just the
short
term. At this time I would have trouble going back to the old ASP .


I am interested in learning, and I want to learn good solid practices from
the start. I have no interest in RAD tools if they aren't up to the
serious work. I'm not doing this as a hobby, it's my living. I want to get
it right from the start.

Thanks for the reply, it's been very interesting. If you could supply some
sample code to show what you mean about ADO.NET it would be even better
;-)

ta ra

alan
"Alan Silver" wrote:
Hello,

This is NOT a troll, it's a genuine question. Please read right
through to see why.

I have been using Vusual Basic and Classic ASP for some years, and
have now started looking at ASP.NET. At first glance, it looks
excellent, albeit nothing that couldn't have been done to Classic ASP.
I have been through a few tutorials and was impressed with how quickly
you can get database info onto a page.

What worries me is if it really is as good as it looks. Some years
ago, MS tried to persuade VB programmers to get into writing web sites
by introducing Web Classes to VB. These looked, at first glance, like
a really quick and easy way to code a web site. The universal opinion
on them was that they were awful when you tried to get anything real
done with them. You spent so much time fighting with the system that
you would have been quicker doing it by hand in the first place.

Same thing happened when MS introduced the Data Environment into VB.
Again, this was supposed to be a RAD tool for getting database-based
apps up quickly. The first impressions were very favourable, but you
quickly found yourself writing more code to fight the system than you
would have done by doing it all by hand in the first place.

There are other examples, but I think the point is clear. That which
appears to be a fantastic way to code initially may turn out to be a
coding nightmare when you try and take the second steps.

So, is ASP.NET the same, or have MS finally got it right? My first
impression is that is it great and could save a lot of time. Trouble
is, I can almost feel myself going back a few years to when I first
tried the Data Environment. That's what worries me, am I going to
start with it and then find it's more bother than it's worth?

Do people do professional sites in ASP.NET and still think it's good?
Maybe this is the wrong place to ask as anyone who hated it and gave
up probably wouldn't be reading here, but I would still like some
reassurance that my time is going to be invested well if I learn
ASP.NET. Given my extensive code library, built up over a number of
years, I can get db-driven web sites up in Classic ASP quite quickly.
I'm not going to drop that unless I know the alternative is a genuine
improvement.

As I said at the start, this is a genuine question, not a troll.
Please reply appropriately. TIA


--
Alan Silver
(anything added below this line is nothing to do with me)

Nov 19 '05 #55
>> it, and seeing as C# is a Java-clone, it looks attractive. Also, since

Exsqueeze me? Java's syntax was developed AFTER C and C++, and was
designed to look like C. NOT the other way around.
I don't think you read my comment right, I said C# (NOT C or C++) was a
Java clone. Java itself is a C++ clone. C# wasn't even thought of when
Java was already making the news.
If you want to use C#, it would behoove you to know at least C, unless
you just want to be a VB developer who uses a different syntax.
Unfortunately, there are quite a few of them out there now. Learning C
will also make you a much more powerful developer overall.


I do know a bit of C. Not a huge amount, but enough to get me by with
simple programs. I have also got a reasonable, though rusty, background
in Java. I am intending to learn C# properly, not just play with it.

--
Alan Silver
(anything added below this line is nothing to do with me)
Nov 19 '05 #56
C# is NOT a Java Clone. It is an extension of C++, just as C++ is an
extension of C. C is the most extensible programming language in the world.
Note that the "#" symbol can be interpreted as 2 "+" symbols intersecting.
C# is C++++.

And Java is not a C++ clone. It simply uses the same (or similar) syntax.
Other than that, it is almost NOTHING like C++. For example, you can't use
pointers in Java. Pointers are practically essential to using C++. I could
go on, talk about memory management, etc., but I hope you get my drift.

--
HTH,

Kevin Spencer
Microsoft MVP
..Net Developer
Neither a follower nor a lender be.

"Alan Silver" <al*********@nospam.thanx> wrote in message
news:Td**************@nospamthankyou.spam...
it, and seeing as C# is a Java-clone, it looks attractive. Also, since


Exsqueeze me? Java's syntax was developed AFTER C and C++, and was
designed to look like C. NOT the other way around.


I don't think you read my comment right, I said C# (NOT C or C++) was a
Java clone. Java itself is a C++ clone. C# wasn't even thought of when
Java was already making the news.
If you want to use C#, it would behoove you to know at least C, unless you
just want to be a VB developer who uses a different syntax. Unfortunately,
there are quite a few of them out there now. Learning C will also make you
a much more powerful developer overall.


I do know a bit of C. Not a huge amount, but enough to get me by with
simple programs. I have also got a reasonable, though rusty, background in
Java. I am intending to learn C# properly, not just play with it.

--
Alan Silver
(anything added below this line is nothing to do with me)

Nov 19 '05 #57
>C# is NOT a Java Clone. It is an extension of C++, just as C++ is an
extension of C. C is the most extensible programming language in the world.
Note that the "#" symbol can be interpreted as 2 "+" symbols intersecting.
C# is C++++.

And Java is not a C++ clone. It simply uses the same (or similar) syntax.
Other than that, it is almost NOTHING like C++. For example, you can't use
pointers in Java. Pointers are practically essential to using C++. I could
go on, talk about memory management, etc., but I hope you get my drift.


OK, two points spring to mind ...

1) My comment that C# being a Java clone came from the fact that MS have
a very strong reason for wanting to oust Java. Producing a language that
is close enough for Java programmers to pick up was a very clever
marketing trick. Maybe I'm wrong, but I'm not alone in that view.

2) As far as Java itself is concerned, I seem to remember reading that
the original intent of Java was to produce a C++ type of language that
had the power without the complexity. It was very closely modelled on
C++, but was worked to avoid such nasties as pointers, which were
generally felt to be more trouble than they were worth. This is not my
opinion, this is what I heard from Java experts, including Sun people,
when Java first hit the big time. Maybe you heard differently ;-)

either way, it was really only a flippant comment. My point was that,
having done (and liked) some Java, C# is close enough to attract me.

Ta ra

--
Alan Silver
(anything added below this line is nothing to do with me)
Nov 19 '05 #58
> 1) My comment that C# being a Java clone came from the fact that MS have a
very strong reason for wanting to oust Java. Producing a language that is
close enough for Java programmers to pick up was a very clever marketing
trick. Maybe I'm wrong, but I'm not alone in that view.


That would be J#, NOT C#.

--
HTH,

Kevin Spencer
Microsoft MVP
..Net Developer
Neither a follower nor a lender be.

"Alan Silver" <al*********@nospam.thanx> wrote in message
news:Gt**************@nospamthankyou.spam...
C# is NOT a Java Clone. It is an extension of C++, just as C++ is an
extension of C. C is the most extensible programming language in the
world.
Note that the "#" symbol can be interpreted as 2 "+" symbols intersecting.
C# is C++++.

And Java is not a C++ clone. It simply uses the same (or similar) syntax.
Other than that, it is almost NOTHING like C++. For example, you can't use
pointers in Java. Pointers are practically essential to using C++. I could
go on, talk about memory management, etc., but I hope you get my drift.


OK, two points spring to mind ...

1) My comment that C# being a Java clone came from the fact that MS have a
very strong reason for wanting to oust Java. Producing a language that is
close enough for Java programmers to pick up was a very clever marketing
trick. Maybe I'm wrong, but I'm not alone in that view.

2) As far as Java itself is concerned, I seem to remember reading that the
original intent of Java was to produce a C++ type of language that had the
power without the complexity. It was very closely modelled on C++, but was
worked to avoid such nasties as pointers, which were generally felt to be
more trouble than they were worth. This is not my opinion, this is what I
heard from Java experts, including Sun people, when Java first hit the big
time. Maybe you heard differently ;-)

either way, it was really only a flippant comment. My point was that,
having done (and liked) some Java, C# is close enough to attract me.

Ta ra

--
Alan Silver
(anything added below this line is nothing to do with me)

Nov 19 '05 #59
>> 1) My comment that C# being a Java clone came from the fact that MS have a
very strong reason for wanting to oust Java. Producing a language that is
close enough for Java programmers to pick up was a very clever marketing
trick. Maybe I'm wrong, but I'm not alone in that view.


That would be J#, NOT C#.


Good point, forgotten about J# ;-)

--
Alan Silver
(anything added below this line is nothing to do with me)
Nov 19 '05 #60

This thread has been closed and replies have been disabled. Please start a new discussion.

Similar topics

15
by: Randall Smith | last post by:
I've been programming in Python for about 2 years. I think it offers the best combination of simplicity and power of any language I have explored. As I write more and larger and complex programs,...
2
isladogs
by: isladogs | last post by:
The next Access Europe meeting will be on Wednesday 7 Feb 2024 starting at 18:00 UK time (6PM UTC) and finishing at about 19:30 (7.30PM). In this month's session, the creator of the excellent VBE...
0
by: DolphinDB | last post by:
Tired of spending countless mintues downsampling your data? Look no further! In this article, you’ll learn how to efficiently downsample 6.48 billion high-frequency records to 61 million...
0
by: Aftab Ahmad | last post by:
Hello Experts! I have written a code in MS Access for a cmd called "WhatsApp Message" to open WhatsApp using that very code but the problem is that it gives a popup message everytime I clicked on...
0
by: Aftab Ahmad | last post by:
So, I have written a code for a cmd called "Send WhatsApp Message" to open and send WhatsApp messaage. The code is given below. Dim IE As Object Set IE =...
0
by: ryjfgjl | last post by:
ExcelToDatabase: batch import excel into database automatically...
0
isladogs
by: isladogs | last post by:
The next Access Europe meeting will be on Wednesday 6 Mar 2024 starting at 18:00 UK time (6PM UTC) and finishing at about 19:15 (7.15PM). In this month's session, we are pleased to welcome back...
0
by: marcoviolo | last post by:
Dear all, I would like to implement on my worksheet an vlookup dynamic , that consider a change of pivot excel via win32com, from an external excel (without open it) and save the new file into a...
0
by: jfyes | last post by:
As a hardware engineer, after seeing that CEIWEI recently released a new tool for Modbus RTU Over TCP/UDP filtering and monitoring, I actively went to its official website to take a look. It turned...
1
by: PapaRatzi | last post by:
Hello, I am teaching myself MS Access forms design and Visual Basic. I've created a table to capture a list of Top 30 singles and forms to capture new entries. The final step is a form (unbound)...

By using Bytes.com and it's services, you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

To disable or enable advertisements and analytics tracking please visit the manage ads & tracking page.