ASP.NET v1.0 or ASP.NET v2.0

Hi,  - thanks for looking at my question!

I'm looking at doing a an ASP course (which I have booked).  I have just found out that the course is for version 1.0.

Is this unusual?  Should I really be learning 2.0?  Is there much difference bewteen the two?

any opinions are appreciated.

Thanks again.

PDM
PigdogmonsterAsked:
Who is Participating?

[Product update] Infrastructure Analysis Tool is now available with Business Accounts.Learn More

x
I wear a lot of hats...

"The solutions and answers provided on Experts Exchange have been extremely helpful to me over the last few years. I wear a lot of hats - Developer, Database Administrator, Help Desk, etc., so I know a lot of things but not a lot about one thing. Experts Exchange gives me answers from people who do know a lot about one thing, in a easy to use platform." -Todd S.

DBAduck - Ben MillerPrincipal ConsultantCommented:
I would say that you would want to be learning 2.0.  There are enough differences and additions like Providers, and the GridView and DataSource controls, that 1.0 would be learning legacy stuff and then having a learning curve for the 2.0 stuff, which I believe many are wanting anyway.

These are my opinions.

Ben Miller

Experts Exchange Solution brought to you by

Your issues matter to us.

Facing a tech roadblock? Get the help and guidance you need from experienced professionals who care. Ask your question anytime, anywhere, with no hassle.

Start your 7-day free trial
AGBrownCommented:
The only reason for using 1.0 would be to maintain legacy code. If you are starting with new development, then I would always use up-to-date code. I use 1.1 only because that's what we started developing our application with before 2.0 was released.

Note that 1.0 is "really old" now in .NET terms, it was surpassed by 1.1 for a significant period even before 2.0 was released. 2.0 will have significant security and performance advnatages, as well as lots of new RAD tools.

Andy
jfoutzCommented:
I agree with AGBrown, only learn 1.x to maintain legacy code.

The new code-behind model alone is more than reason enough to move to 2.0.  IMHO everything else in 2.0 is lagniappe.  (Translation from Louisianian: a little something extra on the side).  

The old code-behind model can be a real headache.  ADO.NET has some improvements.  And some things just work better.  SmartNavigation is a good example of this - it never really worked very well.  It was replaced by MaintainScrollPositionOnPostback, which works fairly well.  Asychronous processing went from very difficult to something that is very doable by average people like me.  I'm sure everyone here who has experience with both 1.x and 2.0 will give you a different set of things that they like/love about the move 2.0.

Bottom line: If you learn 1.x and then later move on to 2.0, you'll probably wonder why you didn't move sooner.
Bootstrap 4: Exploring New Features

Learn how to use and navigate the new features included in Bootstrap 4, the most popular HTML, CSS, and JavaScript framework for developing responsive, mobile-first websites.

AGBrownCommented:
Out of interest, jfoutz, do you have any info/links on the differences in the code-behind model, and what are the advantages that you think are the biggest for that?

Andy
jfoutzCommented:
Andy,

A lot of the problems with the old model related to the control declarations in the codebehind file.  Every control had to be declared in order to have access to it from codebehind.  Visual Studio did this for you, but there were still problems.  Deleting a control didn't always get rid of the declaration.  If you made manual changes to the declarations, problems had a habit of popping up.  Etc., etc., etc...

In the new model, controls don't have to be declared in the codebehind file thus eliminating the problem.  Plus some other nice changes.  There are also very significant changes to both the compilation strategy and the compiler.

A good discussion is at:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/msdnmag/issues/06/01/ExtremeASPNET/
jfoutzCommented:
Another note (Andy),

The upgrade from 1.1 to 2.0 really isn't as painful as you might think, and I would urge you to seriously consider it.

It's generally a straightforward process.  Microsoft has a list of breaking changes at:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/netframework/programming/breakingchanges/default.aspx

Most sites are fairly safe since most of the breaking changes occur in infrequently used classes.  If there are problems, fix those first.  After that, Visual Studio does a good job of upgrading your site.

Ideally you will also eliminate obsolete procedures when you upgrade, but this is optional.  ConfigurationSettings to ConfigurationManager is the most annoying, but is easily done with the Replace In Files feature.  Email handling is probably the second most common change, it takes a touch more work but isn't bad.

Also, if you use Crystal Reports at all, test very thoroughly.  CR has a bad habit of breaking on version changes.
AGBrownCommented:
Well, that's good to know ... I've got so used to adding and removing control declarations that not having to do it almost won't matter, but at first it was a big annoyance.

PDM, I think all of this is a good illustration of the fact that if you are starting from afresh, you should definately go with 2.0 and forget about 1.0.
It's more than this solution.Get answers and train to solve all your tech problems - anytime, anywhere.Try it for free Edge Out The Competitionfor your dream job with proven skills and certifications.Get started today Stand Outas the employee with proven skills.Start learning today for free Move Your Career Forwardwith certification training in the latest technologies.Start your trial today
Microsoft Development

From novice to tech pro — start learning today.