.NET 2003 vs .NET 2005

[Gussy]

Hey,

Would like some opinions on this.

I recently just changed from VB6 to .NET 2005, its a very nice change, and i wouldn't go back, but the programs i make a normally ones i distribute to others over the net, so heres my problem, anyone who wants to use it has to download .NET 2.0, which is a pain.

I was wondering if it is worth going back to .NET 2003 because that should work on most (XP) computers, i also wondered whether the memory usage in 2003 is less than the usage in 2005, i know why its high but i don't like it.

Also, part 2 of the question,
Does C#.NET use less memory than VB.NET?

Oh and another quickie, can either C# or VB be made to run on PPC or Palm

[RobDog888]

It you go back to 2003 then there may be less chance of the user needing the 1.0 or 1.1 framework since its more common. I believe memory usage is better in 2005 then 2003. C# and VB.NET use the same framework so its not very different in memory consumption. Yes, you can create apps for mobile devices but it depends on your version of VB or C#. Anything above the Express versions will support mobile device app creation.

[Gussy]

Hey, thanks you answered pretty much everything i needed to know.
I think i will stick with VS2005
Another question, when it it likeley that .NET2.0 will be as common as 1.0/1.1?

Cheers,
Gussy

[RobDog888]

Just as fast as it takes for VS 2005 to become widespread and Windows Updates users download Framework 2.0. There are alot of VB Express users already so its just a matter of time.

[gigemboy]

Well when Vista ships, you might have the .NET 2.0 framework installed by default (if they don't Im going to be very angry )....

In regards to 2003, which uses the 1.1 framework.. I still run into several computers that do not have any form of the framework installed. Until Microsoft bundles it or installs it by default in a new windows installation, this will continue to be the case, as it is available as an "optional" windows update, and a lot of people never install these optional updates...

[RobDog888]

Also, with Windows Vista, it usually takes 6 months or more at a minimum for a new OS to start to become decently used. So it could possibly take until some time in 2007 before you see any noticeable usage.

[Gussy]

See thats my problem there, if i make an app now, majority of the people who want to use it will have to download at .NET 2.0, this isnt a pain for broardband users but it may have some affect on people, with dialup, or people not wanting to download the framework, this my cause people to not use my program...

As i see it now, theres no point starting with 2003 because some people will have to download 1.1 anyway, so they might as well just download 2.0

Now i have to choose whether to keep going with VB.NET or start using C#.NET...

[RobDog888]

You can also distribute the Framework on CD along with your app. There is no way around this as even when a user buys a program they either have to go to the store and get the physical program or download it from the net.

[jmcilhinney]

You aren't the only developer creating software using .NET and the number will continue to grow. Most people are going to have to get the Framework sometime, so it might as well be when they install your software as any other time. As for using VB.NET or C#, there is no practical difference for the majority of people. C# supports pointers but the vast majority of applications don't require them. VB.NET provides slightly easier ways to achieve certain things through the "My" object but the vast majority of those things aren't that difficult for a half-decent developer anyway. VB.NET uses more lax syntactic rules (although they have been tightened a bit in some areas in 2005) but the majority of people who take advantage of those laxities don't understand the implications of doing so anyway, so anyone with a conscience should always have Option Strict turned On and NEVER ignore a compiler warning.

[Gussy]

I suppose if people complain or question why they need to .NET i will just say that they will have to download it anyway so why not now, if every developer did that then lots of users would upgrade. It would be nice to see MS make 2.0 a dependency of something that ltos of users use like MSN or the likes, as then lots of people would upgrade...

Well i guess i might as well stick with VB.NET, as im prety comfortable with it and it would be a bit pointless to learn a new language just when i want to make a new big app.