Be careful about embracing asp.net 2.0

[jojobar]

Hi Folks,

I just looked at a asp.net 2.0 sample site done with the beta version.

The site is: http://www.ipona.com/samples/0321257278/default.aspx

When I tried to run the site using the firefox browser, it looked
horrible. Half of the UI stuff just got screwed up! I hope it is
because it is just a beta!

We had embraced asp.net ever since it started. Look at the current
browser market, firefox is gaining increasing market share. So if you
release a product in the market, do not assume that your users will
only run it under microsoft IE (even though ms will make you believe
that this will happen in almost all the cases).

If the released version of asp.net 2.0 works in the same way in cross
browser as it does now then there is a concern.

Be careful about embracing asp.net 2.0 for webforms if you think your
application may have to run in other browsers. If you are in the real
market, be prepared for your application to run in internet explorer,
firefox, opera and safari. You cannot ask an unix or mac user to go get
a pc to run your software on ie.

I understand that asp.net 2.0 is a great software. However I do not
think it is too hard to write compatible controls so that it runs
gracefully on some advanced browsers I mentioned above. For example,
Menu controls can now be created using dynamic html and is supported in
all advanced browsers. I hope somebody from microsoft is reading this
post.

I just have to say this, if the internal policy in microsoft is to
favor IE while developing web-based controls, web developers will
probably select other frameworks that will work gracefully in multiple
browser.

Or maybe is it because microsoft wants to create market for third party
controls!!!

Comments?
SK

[Brock Allen]

FWIW, the ASP.NET team has said that they are making efforts to support any
browser with the javascript they emit (like validation controls, client script
callbacks, etc). Also, any ASP.NET control you use will emit XHTML compliant
markup.

As for any particular website built with ASP.NET, well that's still up to
the author of the website. So I could easily build a website that rocks in
FF and sucks in IE. So, just be aware that ASP.NET is simply a tool. The
result depends upon how you use the tool.

-Brock
DevelopMentor
http://staff.develop.com/ballen

Hi Folks,

I just looked at a asp.net 2.0 sample site done with the beta version.

The site is: http://www.ipona.com/samples/0321257278/default.aspx

When I tried to run the site using the firefox browser, it looked
horrible. Half of the UI stuff just got screwed up! I hope it is
because it is just a beta!

We had embraced asp.net ever since it started. Look at the current
browser market, firefox is gaining increasing market share. So if you
release a product in the market, do not assume that your users will
only run it under microsoft IE (even though ms will make you believe
that this will happen in almost all the cases).

If the released version of asp.net 2.0 works in the same way in cross
browser as it does now then there is a concern.

Be careful about embracing asp.net 2.0 for webforms if you think your
application may have to run in other browsers. If you are in the real
market, be prepared for your application to run in internet explorer,
firefox, opera and safari. You cannot ask an unix or mac user to go
get a pc to run your software on ie.

I understand that asp.net 2.0 is a great software. However I do not
think it is too hard to write compatible controls so that it runs
gracefully on some advanced browsers I mentioned above. For example,
Menu controls can now be created using dynamic html and is supported
in all advanced browsers. I hope somebody from microsoft is reading
this post.

I just have to say this, if the internal policy in microsoft is to
favor IE while developing web-based controls, web developers will
probably select other frameworks that will work gracefully in multiple
browser.

Or maybe is it because microsoft wants to create market for third
party controls!!!

Comments?
SK

[Karl Seguin]

Yay..looks like I get to be the first to call you a troll. Seriously
though, it's in beta 1....I'd love to see how rough around the edges your
products are 8 months prior to release! This newsgroup isn't an opinion
page, it's for people to ask help and discuss ASP.Net 1.x...there's a 2.0
newsgroup AND a 2.0 product feedback site, go complain there. I just want
to say it again, IT'S IN BETA. There's nothing to comment on other
than...IT's IN BETA!

Karl

--
MY ASP.Net tutorials
http://www.openmymind.net/ - New and Improved (yes, the popup is annoying)
http://www.openmymind.net/faq.aspx - unofficial newsgroup FAQ (more to
come!)
"jojobar" <sk******@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:11**********************@g14g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com...

Hi Folks,

I just looked at a asp.net 2.0 sample site done with the beta version.

The site is: http://www.ipona.com/samples/0321257278/default.aspx

When I tried to run the site using the firefox browser, it looked
horrible. Half of the UI stuff just got screwed up! I hope it is
because it is just a beta!

We had embraced asp.net ever since it started. Look at the current
browser market, firefox is gaining increasing market share. So if you
release a product in the market, do not assume that your users will
only run it under microsoft IE (even though ms will make you believe
that this will happen in almost all the cases).

If the released version of asp.net 2.0 works in the same way in cross
browser as it does now then there is a concern.

Be careful about embracing asp.net 2.0 for webforms if you think your
application may have to run in other browsers. If you are in the real
market, be prepared for your application to run in internet explorer,
firefox, opera and safari. You cannot ask an unix or mac user to go get
a pc to run your software on ie.

I understand that asp.net 2.0 is a great software. However I do not
think it is too hard to write compatible controls so that it runs
gracefully on some advanced browsers I mentioned above. For example,
Menu controls can now be created using dynamic html and is supported in
all advanced browsers. I hope somebody from microsoft is reading this
post.

I just have to say this, if the internal policy in microsoft is to
favor IE while developing web-based controls, web developers will
probably select other frameworks that will work gracefully in multiple
browser.

Or maybe is it because microsoft wants to create market for third party
controls!!!

Comments?
SK

[Juan T. Llibre]

Considering that it's quite a simple task to add
Firefox detection to any ASP.NET application :

<case
match="^Mozilla/(?'version'(?'major'\d+)(?'minor'\.\d+)(?'letters' \w*)).*">
<case match="^[5-9]\." with="${version}">
tagwriter=System.Web.UI.HtmlTextWriter
</case>
</case>

it's quite surprising that you don't blame ipona.com's
programmers for not doing what they need to do,
instead of blaming ASP.NET 2.0.

Or, maybe you could blame Firefox for
not rendering simple HTML properly.

Or, do you have an ulterior motive for blaming ASP.NET 2.0 ?

Juan T. Llibre
ASP.NET MVP
http://asp.net.do/foros/
Foros de ASP.NET en Español
Ven, y hablemos de ASP.NET...
======================

"jojobar" <sk******@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:11**********************@g14g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com...

Hi Folks,

I just looked at a asp.net 2.0 sample site done with the beta version.

The site is: http://www.ipona.com/samples/0321257278/default.aspx

When I tried to run the site using the firefox browser, it looked
horrible. Half of the UI stuff just got screwed up! I hope it is
because it is just a beta!

We had embraced asp.net ever since it started. Look at the current
browser market, firefox is gaining increasing market share. So if you
release a product in the market, do not assume that your users will
only run it under microsoft IE (even though ms will make you believe
that this will happen in almost all the cases).

If the released version of asp.net 2.0 works in the same way in cross
browser as it does now then there is a concern.

Be careful about embracing asp.net 2.0 for webforms if you think your
application may have to run in other browsers. If you are in the real
market, be prepared for your application to run in internet explorer,
firefox, opera and safari. You cannot ask an unix or mac user to go get
a pc to run your software on ie.

I understand that asp.net 2.0 is a great software. However I do not
think it is too hard to write compatible controls so that it runs
gracefully on some advanced browsers I mentioned above. For example,
Menu controls can now be created using dynamic html and is supported in
all advanced browsers. I hope somebody from microsoft is reading this
post.

I just have to say this, if the internal policy in microsoft is to
favor IE while developing web-based controls, web developers will
probably select other frameworks that will work gracefully in multiple
browser.

Or maybe is it because microsoft wants to create market for third party
controls!!!

Comments?
SK

[jojobar]

Okay I understand BETA and all that. I mentioned that in the post. Also
STOP policing the newsgroup. This is a public group and not just for
answerig questions but for discussion on aspnet and related topics. So
I understand that the discussion on the beta version of aspnet is a
fair game. If you don't like it just delete the post.

owever, next time I wll post these kind of article in the 2.0 group.

[jojobar]

I do *not* have any ulterior motive for blaming asp.net 2.0. It was
just an issue to bring out for discussion. I do not agree we should
blame the FF browser for not being able to render dynamic html created
by MS. It is one of the most compliant browsers.

With ASP.NET 2.0 the trend MS is following (in my opinion) is to
support web controls for various platforms and browsers (mobile
browsers, downlevel browsers etc) seamlessly. Just wondering why not
for other browsers that a lot of people uses.

[Juan T. Llibre]

re:

Just wondering why not for other browsers that a lot of people uses.
The code I posted is ample proof that the ASP.NET platform
supports "other browsers that a lot of people uses" ( sic )

Find something else to beef about.

Not everything should work based on
the "please spoon-feed me" philosophy.

In this case, you just didn't do the research needed.

re: I do not agree we should blame the FF browser for not
being able to render dynamic html created by MS.
Are you saying that standard HTML 4.0, which is what
ASP.NET controls produce, besides HTML 3.2, is too
difficult for FF to read, and that we shouldn't "blame" FF
for not being able to read HTML 4.0 ?

If so, please sustain your point of view.

Certain things, like SmartNavigation, are only understood
by IE but just about everything else is readable by any
browser which supports the HTML 4.0 standard.

Juan T. Llibre
ASP.NET MVP
http://asp.net.do/foros/
Foros de ASP.NET en Español
Ven, y hablemos de ASP.NET...
======================

"jojobar" <sk******@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:11**********************@f14g2000cwb.googlegr oups.com...I do *not* have any ulterior motive for blaming asp.net 2.0. It was
just an issue to bring out for discussion. I do not agree we should
blame the FF browser for not being able to render dynamic html created
by MS. It is one of the most compliant browsers.

With ASP.NET 2.0 the trend MS is following (in my opinion) is to
support web controls for various platforms and browsers (mobile
browsers, downlevel browsers etc) seamlessly. Just wondering why not
for other browsers that a lot of people uses.

[Ken Cox [Microsoft MVP]]

I think you'll find that third-party vendors will do a much better job of
creating cross-browser controls for ASP.NET 2.0

"jojobar" <sk******@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:11**********************@g14g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com...

Hi Folks,

I just looked at a asp.net 2.0 sample site done with the beta version.

The site is: http://www.ipona.com/samples/0321257278/default.aspx

[Jason Bentley]

Wait until the final release before jumping to conclusions. Do you
remember how slow winforms were when .NET 1.0 was beta 1?

Jason Bentley
http://geekswithblogs.net/jbentley

[jasonkester]

jojobar wrote:

With ASP.NET 2.0 the trend MS is following (in my opinion) is to
support web controls for various platforms and browsers (mobile
browsers, downlevel browsers etc) seamlessly. Just wondering why not
for other browsers that a lot of people uses.

There is nothing in ASP.NET that forces you to use anything other than
standard HTML. You can (and in many cases should) shy away from using
asp:... tags when there is a standard HTML equivilant.

If you don't like the HTML that the 2.0 asp:IESpecificWhatever renders
for you, there is nothing to stop you from rolling your own. Just
because ASP.NET allows ex-VB programmers to drag and drop their way to
unmaintainable web applications, doesn't mean you have to.

Jason Kester
Expat Software Consulting Services
http://www.expatsoftware.com/

[Jason Bentley]

Ouch. A bit of a sting but I agree, regardless of their background,
good frameworks can't fix bad programmers.

Jason Bentley
http://geekswithblogs.net/jbentley