PDA

View Full Version : Starting c# and Visual studio



QBall777
Mar 17th, 2006, 07:04 PM
Hi

I've just got Visual Studio and wish to learn c# but have not got a clue were to start really.

Does anyone know some good tutorials for a complete beginner.

Many Thanks

vinyl-junkie
Mar 18th, 2006, 03:11 AM
A couple of suggestions for you:

The book, Build Your Own ASP.NET Website Using C# & VB.NET (http://www.sitepoint.com/books/aspnet1/). An excellent resource for newbies. You can download the first four chapters for free, for a no risk try-it-before-you-buy-it offer.

Training videos on Visual Studio - http://www.learnvisualstudio.net/. Subscription isn't free, but there are some free videos you can watch to see if you'd like to subscribe. At any subscription level, this is well worth the money spent.

QBall777
Mar 18th, 2006, 10:35 AM
Thats great thanks for your help, I must say it's all looking pretty complicated at the moment.

Cheers :thumbsup:

drhowarddrfine
Mar 18th, 2006, 01:32 PM
One of the big stumbling blocks is learning Visual Studio. There is quite a learning curve and I don't think it's much help for the individual designer. It's more useful in a large group of programmers. Personally, I've found we get more work done using simple editors than spending time trying to get VS to work right.

vinyl-junkie
Mar 18th, 2006, 03:58 PM
Quite a learning curve? Yes and no. Yes, in the sense that learning it isn't intuitive. By that, I mean that you can't just hack your way through the tool and learn as you go like you can with some other editors. Once you get the hang of how it works though, a whole new level of productivity opens up to you. That's productivity that will leave all other .NET code editors in the dust!

vinyl-junkie
Mar 18th, 2006, 04:04 PM
I must say it's all looking pretty complicated at the moment.


I feel your pain, as I'm actually still very much in a learning phase myself (I'm using VB.NET instead of C#). My employer is in the process of converting their old legacy mainframe code to .NET, and I was told I wouldn't be able to do any coding until I learned both Visual Studio and .NET. That's quite a lot to dump on someone at once; however, it's well worth the effort.

I've found that most employers want you to know both, so it's a good career move to put in the effort to do just that.

drhowarddrfine
Mar 18th, 2006, 05:04 PM
I've found that most employers want you to know both, so it's a good career move to put in the effort to do just that.Where I live, a fairly large city, all the large employers use Java and very little .NET stuff. Only in the last few months have I seen a few ads for .net programmers, but it's small compared to Java and others.

vinyl-junkie
Mar 18th, 2006, 05:20 PM
I should have qualified my statement a bit, I see. I work for state government and most of our state agencies seem to be moving over to .NET. I wouldn't know about the demand for the work force in general.

<edit>And we're getting off-topic from the original discussion. I must apologize for that.</edit>

QBall777
Mar 19th, 2006, 10:16 AM
Thanks for all your comments. I appreciate there may be other solutions to web based programs but I feel the future defiantly points towards the .NET framework. I might as well start swatting now.

drhowarddrfine
Mar 19th, 2006, 03:17 PM
there may be other solutions to web based programs but I feel the future defiantly points towards the .NET framework. Not true. Most of the web does not use .NET. .NET only runs on Windows computers so anything you create for it won't run on Macs or other non-Windows computers.

vinyl-junkie
Mar 19th, 2006, 03:34 PM
Always the naysayer, eh, Dr. Howard? :rolleyes: One thing I failed to mention in my last post is this: The more technologies someone has under their belt, the better their chances of getting - or keeping - a job.

Yes, it's true that .NET only runs on Windows. However, I have heard that there are some open source initiatives underway that may change that. Whether or not that comes to pass though, my original comment remains true: Knowledge of more technologies equates to a better chance of employment.

drhowarddrfine
Mar 19th, 2006, 03:34 PM
I think I'll backtrack a bit on my statement. I just looked at a few things which confuse more than confirm anything. I see articles stating .NET usage on the web has evened up, or surpassed, Java. But you need IIS to run it. Yet, 80% of the web uses Apache as their server while only 20% uses IIS (all roughly). So how can .NET even up with Java?

Yes, there is the Mono project but, last I heard, it's not all there yet. One article talked of in-house use of .NET vs Java and there I can see it happening with an office full of Win computers. Otherwise, this doesn't make sense.

drhowarddrfine
Mar 19th, 2006, 03:39 PM
Always the naysayer, eh, Dr. Howard?Not really. I find too many people too easily buying into the hype. I spent months learning asp.net, and .net itself, and I rejected it. So I have reason for disuading others from using it. Just like others would disuade you from using PHP or Java.

Look at Ajax, the latest hype. You would think it was a new html for the web. Everybody's talking it up but it's just a feature. .NET is Microsofts latest hyped up toy. Elsewhere I linked an article saying MS has even lost confidence in it.

So.....there ya' go.

vinyl-junkie
Mar 19th, 2006, 03:49 PM
.NET is Microsofts latest hyped up toy.
Microsoft's "toy" has been around for a number of years now. With all the work they've put into it, I doubt seriously if it will fall by the wayside anytime soon, especially with a recently released new version of the .NET framework and of Visual Studio. It *is* being used extensively in industry, whether you want to believe it or not. What it's market share is, I cannot say. All I can say is that it *is* definitely worth adding to someone's skillset. You disagree, which is your prerogative. Fine. We'll just agree to disagree.

drhowarddrfine
Mar 19th, 2006, 05:10 PM
With all the work they've put into it, I doubt seriously if it will fall by the wayside anytime soonYou mean like ASP? Or VB6?

vinyl-junkie
Mar 19th, 2006, 05:15 PM
You mean like ASP? Or VB6?
What's your point? Classic ASP and VB6 are backward compatible with the latest version of .NET. So are (I think) latest versions of PHP, Java, etc. I'm not sure what you're getting at.

drhowarddrfine
Mar 19th, 2006, 07:52 PM
Both have fallen out of favor with MS and they are moving on. My point is .NET is in favor until they find out it isn't so great after all. Or the money runs dry, in which case they move on to the next money machine.

vinyl-junkie
Mar 19th, 2006, 11:25 PM
Both have fallen out of favor because Microsoft brought something on board that was better than either of them - .NET. But again, so what? They're both compatible with .NET applications. I still don't get your point.

drhowarddrfine
Mar 20th, 2006, 02:25 AM
You can use ASP techniques with ASP.net? You can use VB6 with .NET? I'll give you minor tweaks but are you telling me they can be used on .NET without change?

vinyl-junkie
Mar 20th, 2006, 03:07 AM
You can use ASP techniques with ASP.net? You can use VB6 with .NET? I'll give you minor tweaks but are you telling me they can be used on .NET without change?
Yes, that's exactly what I'm telling you. That's what I was talking about when I said that .NET was backward compatible with them. I guess Microsoft is a bit smarter than you give them credit for, huh? :p

drhowarddrfine
Mar 20th, 2006, 03:48 AM
Not at all. I've read that VB6 users are furious with MS for not supporting VB6 and that VB for .NET is totally different for them. Also, last I heard, ASP is significantly different than ASP.NET and they have to throw away many of the things they've learned over the years. That is why there are two boards here for posting to asp and asp.net. But you are telling me this isn't true?

drhowarddrfine
Mar 20th, 2006, 03:55 AM
So it was Joel on Software (http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/APIWar.html) where I think I first heard it since I kept the link.

The first big win was making Visual Basic.NET not backwards-compatible with VB 6.0.
And about how vb6 developers are "up in arms" but that's not really what I was looking for. Haven't looked for the ASP link yet.

Wikipedia says:

Even though ASP.NET takes its name from Microsoft's old web development technology, ASP, the two differ significantly.

Also:

VB.NET is a totally new tool from the ground up, not backwards compatible with VB6.

vinyl-junkie
Mar 21st, 2006, 02:07 AM
Well, you're right about one thing. After a little Googling, I'll concede that there are *some* changes one has to make to their code to convert VB6 and classic ASP to .NET. However, you make it sound like developers have to totally rewrite their code when converting to .NET. Not true. In fact, pages such as this one (http://www.4guysfromrolla.com/webtech/053001-1.shtml) would seem to suggest that there aren't that many coding changes that would need to be made. I can't speak from personal experience though. I did find what appears to be an interesting conversion tool (http://www.asp.net/migrationassistants/asp2aspnet.aspx?tabindex=0&tabid=1), so it would appear that things are not as bleak as you would have us believe.

I'm still trying to figure out where you're coming from on this whole thing. Are you one of those "I hate Microsoft" kind of guys so by extension, everything they do sucks in some way? Would you have them stand still while the rest of the world moves toward object oriented code? How do you think they should develop their software?

drhowarddrfine
Mar 21st, 2006, 02:48 AM
Hey, I live near Rolla. I know people who went to Rolla. Don't trust people from Rolla.:D

I'm not anti-MS though I agree I can come across as such. I was burned by this whole ASP.NET thing a while back and I almost got burned by IEs quirks, bugs and everything else we all complain about, so I have a bad taste in my mouth from such things. That isn't the cause of my complaints against MS as much as it opened my eyes and made me look at the big picture. While Microsoft has created some wonderful prodcuts, it frequently takes place to the detrement of the developer and the community at large.

What I mean by detrement of the developer is the poor guys feeling he must run as fast as he can just to stay in one place. This constantly changing landscape is not created by new methods or technologies as much as it is created by an artificial need to continue to fill the coffers of MS. Yes, this is the job of any business, to make money and not the advancement of software and technology for the greater good unless that greater good makes greater money. I do not blame them for this but I do not have to like it.

What I mean by the detrement of the community at large is by their not following the standards of the world community but force us to follow their flag, for good or for ill. It's OK to create new elements for browsers which do new things. It is not OK for IE to not follow those standards but, due to its almost forced use on the average user, we must create non-standard elements just for its use. With great power comes great responsibility and Microsoft shows none of that responsibility.

As I mentioned elsewhere, Microsoft is a member of the web standards committee yet they are the least likely to follow standards web programming practices. This, as some would say, is one of the reasons MS is evil.

Ignoring all that, while some may say I am anti-Microsoft because I point out the deficiencies of IE and the wonders of Firefox or Opera, you would probably find more people who are unaware and just as much a fan of Internet Explorer and wouldn't dream of touching FF. So I am like them but choose the other side.

vinyl-junkie
Mar 21st, 2006, 03:12 AM
Your days of complaining about IE may be coming to an end soon, if you believe what's in this newsletter (http://www.sitepoint.com/newsletter/viewissue.php?id=3&issue=131). You might be complaining about having to take all those CSS hacks out of your code instead of putting them in. :D

There is one inescapable fact about Microsoft though: They have the lion's share of the market, so like what they do or not, we all have to cater to them.

QBall777
Mar 21st, 2006, 09:22 AM
Well what can I say!! :eek:

I'm really pleased I started this thread I've listened to both sides of the discussion and have learnt a great deal. I have decided to follow the C# path whether it leads me up the garden or not however I am now more aware of certain pitfalls the .NET framework may have, and I will not be turning my back on other languages and skills.

Thanks for all your comments, its been educational and fun.

drhowarddrfine
Mar 21st, 2006, 01:57 PM
You might be complaining about having to take all those CSS hacks out of your code instead of putting them in.You've brought up a major point. You don't use those hacks for IE7 but IE6 isn't disappearing for years to come. So you have to have one version of your page for IE6, one for IE7, one for the other IEs and, now get this ONE version for ALL other browsers. Why do we need three versions for Microsoft browsers but only one for everybody else? Yes, I know, I'm exaggerating a bit but not completely.

Hey, QBall, quit butting into our discu....oh....sorry.

vinyl-junkie
Mar 22nd, 2006, 02:51 AM
Hey, QBall, quit butting into our discu....oh....sorry.

:D That's funny!

Sorry, Q. I know we highjacked your thread, and I must again apologize. You and I both can learn .NET and Visual Studio together, as I'm still very much a newbie at it.

Dr. Howard, do I read your comments correctly? You're complaining because we'll have to put hacks in our CSS for IE6?! Gee, I thought you'd be happy that Microsoft is finally fixing some of those bugs that prompted us to put the hacks in there in the first place. Like Netscape 4 and others, we'll someday be able to drop those hacks and say we're not gonna support IE6 anymore!

drhowarddrfine
Mar 22nd, 2006, 04:03 AM
The only reason they were needed is because Microsoft didn't try and fix them for five years! Now hundreds of thousands of web sites are going to have to use both versions for years more! That's my gripe. If MS would learn how to produce a proper browser in the first place we wouldn't need hundreds of web sites discussing how to fix IE to make it work. It's like fiddling with rabbit ears on a television trying to make a page display in IE.

So, great. IE7 will now bring Microsoft into 1998 as far as CSS goes.

vinyl-junkie
Mar 22nd, 2006, 04:57 AM
Better late than never! :thumbsup:

Brandoe85
Mar 23rd, 2006, 04:43 AM
Really it comes down to what vinyl-junkie mentiond. OOP

If you're comming from a classic asp/vb6 environment, then sure it's going to be a different beast to take on to learn .NET but it's a step in the right direction if you're looking to become an object oriented programmer. It's not just going to be learning a new language, it's going to help you learn about OOP in general.

If you're on a goose about how you despise microsoft because of IE then well, lets take a look at php, php is taking the right direction towards OOP, but their not microsoft so are you saying you're willing to take that on? I don't know about you but I don't just use one language, and knowing multiple languages is a huge plus, and even though the syntax is different, the conceptual idea of OOP is the same regardless.

The list could go on and on about the major differences from classic asp/vb6 to .NET. But if you were to ask me, the pros would outweigh the cons tremendously.

It looks like this started out as a question about C#, to a discussion about upgrading to .net then to IE. So I really don't know where to start or begin when theres so much to cover. I at least hope the original posters question was answered. :)