Web Forms, Are they good or bad?

[max caber]

I am not 100% sold on WebForms. Don't get me wrong, I have found them to
be a reliable and efficient way to produce both HTML (client) and Server
side code. I see them as a way to "hide the developer" from HTML and HTTP,
and let the developer use an easier, "VB Like Programming Model". In other
words, if you have experience with VB Forms, and know nothing about HTTP/HTML
you can come up to speed on web applications real quick. For exapmle, it
was a no brainer to create an app that used an <input type=file> and save
the POSTed file to an SQL DB.

So what is my problem? 1.I already know HTTP/HTML so it does not same "me"
that much time and now I have to learn this new "Web Form API", although
it is a better API then HTTP/HTML. 2.If I get used to "Web Forms" I could
forget HTTP/HTML and then be "locked in to MS". In other words, it is tempting
me to leave an "open standard" for a "vendor specific API"
Your thoughts,
Max

[Russell Jones]

You don't have to use the conveniences--all the HTML controls are still
there, and you can use the Page_Load method and the Response, Request, etc.
objects just as with classic ASP to process all the request and response
data. So any time you feel in danger of forgetting HTML, just don't use
server controls. In my opinion, although its easy to forget the _syntax_ of
a technology you've mastered, it's much less likely that you'll forget what
it _does_. And if necessary, you can reaquire the syntax relatively easily.
So there's no lock-in here other than developer convenience.

With that said, you're right to be skeptical of Web Forms--their convenience
comes at a price in server resources and network bandwidth, because the
server controls' EnableViewState is on by default. Make sure you turn off
ViewState for all controls for which you don't need to maintain page state,
and use HTML controls rather than server controls except when you need the
added convenience.

"max caber" <maxcaber@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3c368e6e$1@147.208.176.211...
>
> I am not 100% sold on WebForms. Don't get me wrong, I have found them to
> be a reliable and efficient way to produce both HTML (client) and Server
> side code. I see them as a way to "hide the developer" from HTML and
HTTP,
> and let the developer use an easier, "VB Like Programming Model". In
other
> words, if you have experience with VB Forms, and know nothing about
HTTP/HTML
> you can come up to speed on web applications real quick. For exapmle, it
> was a no brainer to create an app that used an <input type=file> and save
> the POSTed file to an SQL DB.
>
> So what is my problem? 1.I already know HTTP/HTML so it does not same
"me"
> that much time and now I have to learn this new "Web Form API", although
> it is a better API then HTTP/HTML. 2.If I get used to "Web Forms" I could
> forget HTTP/HTML and then be "locked in to MS". In other words, it is
tempting
> me to leave an "open standard" for a "vendor specific API"
> Your thoughts,
> Max

[max caber]

"Russell Jones" <arj1@northstate.net> wrote:
"their convenience
comes at a price in server resources and network bandwidth, because the
server controls' EnableViewState is on by default. Make sure you turn off
ViewState for all controls for which you don't need to maintain page state,
and use HTML controls rather than server controls except when you need the
added convenience."

I doubt that passing a controls state back and forth is going to create a
performace bottleneck. A control's state usualy contains a few chars at
8 bits a char, while most web pages contain multiple 40KB - 100KB .JPG's.
But I agree that it is strange that the default setting is true, because
most users expect a forms fields to be cleared after the data is posted.

[Russell Jones]

"max caber" <maxcaber@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3c37948c@147.208.176.211...
>
> I doubt that passing a controls state back and forth is going to create a
> performace bottleneck. A control's state usualy contains a few chars at
> 8 bits a char, while most web pages contain multiple 40KB - 100KB .JPG's.
> But I agree that it is strange that the default setting is true, because
> most users expect a forms fields to be cleared after the data is posted.
>
LOL.
Obviously, you haven't looked at ViewState for Table, DataGrid and List
controls.

[Michael Culley]

Max,

you forgot to mention that they will most likely not work as well with
netscape

--
Michael Culley
www.vbdotcom.com


"max caber" <maxcaber@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3c368e6e$1@147.208.176.211...
>
> I am not 100% sold on WebForms. Don't get me wrong, I have found them to
> be a reliable and efficient way to produce both HTML (client) and Server
> side code. I see them as a way to "hide the developer" from HTML and
HTTP,
> and let the developer use an easier, "VB Like Programming Model". In
other
> words, if you have experience with VB Forms, and know nothing about
HTTP/HTML
> you can come up to speed on web applications real quick. For exapmle, it
> was a no brainer to create an app that used an <input type=file> and save
> the POSTed file to an SQL DB.
>
> So what is my problem? 1.I already know HTTP/HTML so it does not same
"me"
> that much time and now I have to learn this new "Web Form API", although
> it is a better API then HTTP/HTML. 2.If I get used to "Web Forms" I could
> forget HTTP/HTML and then be "locked in to MS". In other words, it is
tempting
> me to leave an "open standard" for a "vendor specific API"
> Your thoughts,
> Max

[Rob Teixeira]

The "cute" features of webforms work best with IE5+, but you can specifically
target IE/Netscape 4.0 with webforms (by just changing a property). As you
might suspect, you lose some of the goodies. However, from the perspective
of a developer/user who doesn't know what's going on behind the scenes, most
things will "work" similarly, they'll just use different mechanisms.

To be honest, there are some features in web forms that make me think of
old data-binding, and I'm likely to be very picky about what webforms features
I'm likely to use. At a higher level, the webforms model is a definite improvement
over old-school ASP.

-Rob

"Michael Culley" <mike@vbdotcom.com> wrote:
>Max,
>
>you forgot to mention that they will most likely not work as well with
>netscape
>
>--
>Michael Culley
>www.vbdotcom.com

[Ian Oliver]

The MS Web controls automatically scale their output to downlevel browsers.
This means that less capable browsers will have to post-back more frequently.
When running with IE, the control can spit out JScript to provide more client-side
functionality and reduce the number of client-server round-trips. Netscape
is not locked out. These controls will work with any HTML 3.2 client (possibly
going back further, but I am not sure).

If you bake your own controls, you can test the browser and push the appropriate
content.

"Michael Culley" <mike@vbdotcom.com> wrote:
>Max,
>
>you forgot to mention that they will most likely not work as well with
>netscape
>
>--
>Michael Culley
>www.vbdotcom.com
>
>
>"max caber" <maxcaber@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:3c368e6e$1@147.208.176.211...
>>
>> I am not 100% sold on WebForms. Don't get me wrong, I have found them
to
>> be a reliable and efficient way to produce both HTML (client) and Server
>> side code. I see them as a way to "hide the developer" from HTML and
>HTTP,
>> and let the developer use an easier, "VB Like Programming Model". In
>other
>> words, if you have experience with VB Forms, and know nothing about
>HTTP/HTML
>> you can come up to speed on web applications real quick. For exapmle,
it
>> was a no brainer to create an app that used an <input type=file> and save
>> the POSTed file to an SQL DB.
>>
>> So what is my problem? 1.I already know HTTP/HTML so it does not same
>"me"
>> that much time and now I have to learn this new "Web Form API", although
>> it is a better API then HTTP/HTML. 2.If I get used to "Web Forms" I could
>> forget HTTP/HTML and then be "locked in to MS". In other words, it is
>tempting
>> me to leave an "open standard" for a "vendor specific API"
>> Your thoughts,
>> Max
>
>

[Greg]

Are people actually still developing for Netscape? Last time I checked the
percentage of Netscape users in the browser market was about 5%, now I raise
the serious question once again whether is it worth taking a 5% browser market
into account when doing developments?

Greg


>>
>>you forgot to mention that they will most likely not work as well with
>>netscape

[MarkN]

People are still using browsers to house/deploy applications? Last time
I checked, the move was away from browsers.

"Greg" <greg@i-online.co.za> wrote:
>
>Are people actually still developing for Netscape? Last time I checked the
>percentage of Netscape users in the browser market was about 5%, now I raise
>the serious question once again whether is it worth taking a 5% browser
market
>into account when doing developments?
>
>Greg
>
>
>>>
>>>you forgot to mention that they will most likely not work as well with
>>>netscape
>

[David A. Rothgery]

Greg <greg@i-online.co.za> wrote:
>
> Are people actually still developing for Netscape? Last time I checked the
> percentage of Netscape users in the browser market was about 5%, now I raise
> the serious question once again whether is it worth taking a 5% browser market
> into account when doing developments?

More like 10%. But that's an average. The web site I develop for has far
more Mac users than average (because a major customer uses Macs
exclusively), and slightly more Netscape users than average. And even
though they're using Windows machines or Macs, and so can and should use
IE, I can't exactly tell paying customers to get a better browser.

--
Dave Rothgery
Picking nits since 1976
drothgery@alum.wpi.edu
http://drothgery.editthispage.com

[MarkN]

Have you tried to get them to use Opera? Oh, you mean IE is the better
browser!

David A. Rothgery <drothgery@alum.wpi.edu> wrote:
>Greg <greg@i-online.co.za> wrote:
>>
>> Are people actually still developing for Netscape? Last time I checked
the
>> percentage of Netscape users in the browser market was about 5%, now I
raise
>> the serious question once again whether is it worth taking a 5% browser
market
>> into account when doing developments?
>
>More like 10%. But that's an average. The web site I develop for has far

>more Mac users than average (because a major customer uses Macs
>exclusively), and slightly more Netscape users than average. And even
>though they're using Windows machines or Macs, and so can and should use

>IE, I can't exactly tell paying customers to get a better browser.
>
>--
>Dave Rothgery
>Picking nits since 1976
>drothgery@alum.wpi.edu
>http://drothgery.editthispage.com

[Markn]

Bob <rainsleyno@bodyspamsolutions.com> wrote:
>In article <3c3d3fea$1@147.208.176.211>, greg@i-online.co.za says...
>>
>> Are people actually still developing for Netscape? Last time I checked
the
>> percentage of Netscape users in the browser market was about 5%, now I
raise
>> the serious question once again whether is it worth taking a 5% browser
market
>> into account when doing developments?
>>
>> Greg
>>
>Well, approximately 28% of the browsers that hit my employer's web site
are
>Netscape and I don't think my employer is willing to just toss away 28%
of
>his potential customers.
>
>Bob

According to most of the posters here the majority, Window's PC users, rules
[the world of all computers - PC or not]. So you should forgo those extra
bucks.

[MarkN]

"David Rothgery" <drothgery@alum.wpi.edu> wrote:
>
>"Markn" <mnuttall@nospam.com> wrote in message
>news:3c3da9e3@147.208.176.211...
>> According to most of the posters here the majority, Window's PC users,
>rules
>> [the world of all computers - PC or not]. So you should forgo those extra
>> bucks.
>
>I think that you'd find that either
>1) A very large percentage of Bob's Netscape users are using Windows, and
a
>very large percentage of the rest are using Macs.
>OR
>2) Bob's employer's site targets a niche market where there a lot of Unix
>users.
>
>
>--
>Dave Rothgery
>david_rothgery@stratagene.com
>
>
>

Today, probably. So if they are using Windows or Macs, they should be using
IE because it is available/installed?

[Bob]

In article <3c3d3fea$1@147.208.176.211>, greg@i-online.co.za says...
>
> Are people actually still developing for Netscape? Last time I checked the
> percentage of Netscape users in the browser market was about 5%, now I raise
> the serious question once again whether is it worth taking a 5% browser market
> into account when doing developments?
>
> Greg
>
Well, approximately 28% of the browsers that hit my employer's web site are
Netscape and I don't think my employer is willing to just toss away 28% of
his potential customers.

Bob

[David Rothgery]

"Markn" <mnuttall@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:3c3da9e3@147.208.176.211...
> According to most of the posters here the majority, Window's PC users,
rules
> [the world of all computers - PC or not]. So you should forgo those extra
> bucks.

I think that you'd find that either
1) A very large percentage of Bob's Netscape users are using Windows, and a
very large percentage of the rest are using Macs.
OR
2) Bob's employer's site targets a niche market where there a lot of Unix
users.


--
Dave Rothgery
david_rothgery@stratagene.com