.NET , Revolution or Assault?
-
There are companies running significant applications built on the .NET Framework and have been so for a while. So it's already in the real world. The .NET Framework Beta 2 had most all of the debug code removed according to a briefing I heard at Technet, meaning it was essentially production ready. The big holdup was VS.NET, which was still being debugged.
Anti-trust or no, the bottom line is that for all of McNealy's wailings, Microsoft has actually taken quite a few steps towards allowing its stuff to be standardized than Sun. Sun flat out pulled Java off the table, both in the US and in Europe.
As far as Open Source is concerned, while I am a big proponent of Open Source, I don't feel Microsoft or any other company is under obligation to reveal its own intellectual property in an Open Source license. That's like saying Aunt Martha has to reveal the ingredient list and steps for preparation of her special Texas Barbecue sauce (hypothetical example) because who knows what could be in it!
K. Brian Kelley
http://www.sqlservercentral.com/columnists/bkelley/
K. Brian Kelley
@kbriankelley -
So you KNOW the recipe for Aunt Martha's sauce? I have the one for Steve Jones SQL Scones.
Andy
-
No, Aunt Martha protects her recipe with a cast-iron pan.
K. Brian Kelley
http://www.sqlservercentral.com/columnists/bkelley/
K. Brian Kelley
@kbriankelley -
Well, Guys, it seems to me that Antares686 is simply restating what Steve said, to wit:
"I think the IDEA of .NET is great. However, I am skeptical of the security and programming of the MS people as THE END ALL tool. They have a poor track record and often cause issues because they want a proprietary system.. . .Lastly, I am concerned that C# and VB.NET do not produce the same CLR. Never got a good answer why not, but it will still lead to some people choosing one language over the other because there will be a performance difference."
with a different emphasis, that of the current legal environment. The fact that MS could blithely go about creating a new yet eerily similar software situation to the one that put them in the INTERNATIONAL hot water they are currently in may be business as usual but improper all the same.
As for the software, we will all probably end up using it for the same reasons we end up using most of MS's other products--it has market share and appears easy to use. (Easy until you have to deal with all the omissions, bugs and "proprietary" techniques, that is.)
Sivea
Sivea -
There are some good points of view on Slashdot this week. and one from Bill Joy as well as some discussion from the guy who is porting to Linux.
Steve Jones
-
Just as an aside and to poke at Microsoft for fun has anyone seen this: <a href="http://news.zdnet.co.uk/story/0,,t269-s2102244,00.html">.Net vote rigging illustrates importance of Web services</a>.
-
Maybe this should be another topic, but what does everybody think of .NET for stored procedures?
Is anyone drooling at the thought of creating their next sp's in VB or VB Script? Is it about time we replace T-SQL? Or might that just open a can of worms making it seem more accessible to non-SQL developers? Might it be an obstacle in getting developers to think set based vs. cursor based (since any .NET language is going to have to be cursor based).
As a point of interest, Oracle brags in ads about their support for Java stored procedures. However the documentation and recommendations on the subject say to use it judiciously, it performs poorly compared to PL/SQL. So there should be clear advantages to using the Java to offset the performance hit. I wonder if .NET sp's won't have the same limitations.
JasonL
JasonL -
For me, I am not anxious for .NET to come out. I am unsure if it will be a good thing or a bad thing. If our programmers start using many languages at once it will make it harder for me to debug and possibly tune their stored procedures as I don't really know any programming language. On the positive side, if they start using other langauges it will give me the excuse I need to study and learn them and in the end I'll pick up a programming language or two.
I don't think T-SQL will ever get replaced as it is a key element in manipulating data. You're always going to need to see data and change data and you have to have some way of telling the database what table to get the data from and what database and what columns to display otherwise you'll get no where with a database.
Robert Marda
Robert W. Marda
Billing and OSS Specialist - SQL Programmer
MCL Systems -
Personally I be scared to see stored procedures or any SQL object in VB, C, etc. Those guys are funamenatally row or object oriented. SQL and RDBMSs are set oriented. Could lead to HUGE performance problems.
Of course, I hear cursors are very optimized in Oracle, so perhaps the SQL dev team will work on this area.
Steve Jones
-
Like anything else, .Net will require some adjustments. Here the plan will be that any server side gets done in VB.Net simply because that's what I have the most experience with. Even company wide I'm hoping that will be the standard - just because you CAN program in Perl.Net doesn't mean you should. If everyone does, great, but why have 12 different languages going on. Code review would suck.
Andy
-
-
Just think of all the poor DBAs who know SQL being told now they will have to support VB, PERL, C(all versions), COBOL or any other language. Imagine the job security now. Use the most unusual .NET language in SQL and make it real hard for the companies to hire someone to take your place, thus ensuring they almost cannot fire you.
-
As with anything else, standards will have to be established. It wouldn't surprise me if most organizations open up VB.NET and C# (meaning a DBA will need to learn these), but I am sure all will draw the line somewhere. The lines for a DBA have blurred so much now that it'll soon be just another part of the skill set.
K. Brian Kelley
http://www.sqlservercentral.com/columnists/bkelley/
K. Brian Kelley
@kbriankelley -
My concern is that currently T-SQL provides a barrier to entry, if you will, for the average procedural language developer. IMO that is a good thing. I know too many _DB_ developers who because of procedural background use cursors for everything in their sp's.
My fear would be that if you can develop stored procedures in VBScript, then every guy who has copied and pasted some VBScript/ADO code into a web page is going to be considered qualified to write stored procedures. Yikes!!
But, it goes back IMO to education - of managers. For their own sake MS needs to make it clear that just because SQL Server has a great GUI with very helpful wizards, it still requires someone with experience and education to be a SQL Server DBA. Similarly if .NET opens up the stored procedure world to anyone who knows a little VBScript, MS will have to educate (non-technical) managers that it takes more than a little VBScript knowledge to write effective stored procedures.
My $.02 ...
JasonL
JasonL -
Hey anybody seen this. Another poke at Microsoft http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1105-837426.html
Viewing 15 posts - 31 through 44 (of 44 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply