DotNet WinForm Development Uptake

  • Thread starter Thread starter James S
  • Start date Start date
J

James S

Hi,

With DotNet having been around for a while, are there any good resources
that detail what the uptake of the framework has been for Windows
Application development? For example is DotNet anywhere near replacing Win32
development? Or is Win32 development still leading the way?

The other question is, how many desktop machines actually have the framework
installed?

If anyone knows of any good resources of where it is possible to find out
such information, it would be much appreciated.

J
 
James S said:
Hi,

With DotNet having been around for a while, are there any good resources
that detail what the uptake of the framework has been for Windows
Application development? For example is DotNet anywhere near replacing
Win32 development? Or is Win32 development still leading the way?

The other question is, how many desktop machines actually have the
framework installed?

If anyone knows of any good resources of where it is possible to find out
such information, it would be much appreciated.
Click to expand...

Is this a question relating to a development decision or are you just
curious to get some figure that says X% of Windows computers have the
version Y of the .Net framework installed?

SP
 
SP said:
Is this a question relating to a development decision or are you just
curious to get some figure that says X% of Windows computers have the
version Y of the .Net framework installed?

SP
Click to expand...

Hi SP,

I suppose its mainly a development decision question. For instance, is the
majority of Windows Desktop development still using traditional tools and
the Win32 API, or is a significant amount (does anybody know of any
estimates?) now carried out using .net?

An estimate of the % of machines that have the framework installed would be
interesting, as one would assume that this would also help to indicate how
much development is going in in .net. e.g. if only 20% of machines have the
framework installed, then it would seem like the uptake is still quite low.

Many thanks

J
 
Hi SP,
I suppose its mainly a development decision question. For instance, is the
majority of Windows Desktop development still using traditional tools and
the Win32 API, or is a significant amount (does anybody know of any
estimates?) now carried out using .net?

An estimate of the % of machines that have the framework installed would
be interesting, as one would assume that this would also help to indicate
how much development is going in in .net. e.g. if only 20% of machines
have the framework installed, then it would seem like the uptake is still
quite low.
Click to expand...

If you develop using the .Net framework then you are going to come across
machines that do not have the framework already installed (with the version
you require). So the framework becomes the part of your installation
requirements. If this is not acceptable then you should stick with Win32
development. I came from a VB background so installing runtime files was
something I always had to deal with. The .Net framework made deployment
easier.

HTH

SP
 
SP said:
If you develop using the .Net framework then you are going to come across
machines that do not have the framework already installed (with the
version you require). So the framework becomes the part of your
installation requirements. If this is not acceptable then you should stick
with Win32 development. I came from a VB background so installing runtime
files was something I always had to deal with. The .Net framework made
deployment easier.

HTH

SP
Click to expand...
Thanks SP,

I guess the crux of my question is, how successful has Microsoft's .net been
at being accepted by the community that develops Windows Desktop
Applications? I remember reading a long time ago that .net is the way of the
future and the core of Windows will revolve around the technology. - this
was when 1.0 was being released.

But as I search through the newsgroups etc, I see that there appears to be a
lot of developers still against the the .net technology, and it is even
cited that Microsoft has gotten cold feet over .net, with there being less
..net technology built into Vista than originally planned.

On one side you have the anti .net people ranting, and on the other there is
the Microsoft marketing machine telling us all how good .net is. Rather than
read the opinions of the respective sides, I'd like to see what the actual
state of play is so far in terms of a rough % of the win32/.net development
split, and how many machines are estimated to have the framework(s)
installed.

So far trying to get an idea of this information appears to be difficult to
come accross.

James.
 
I guess the crux of my question is, how successful has Microsoft's .net
been at being accepted by the community that develops Windows Desktop
Applications? I remember reading a long time ago that .net is the way of
the future and the core of Windows will revolve around the technology. -
this was when 1.0 was being released.

But as I search through the newsgroups etc, I see that there appears to be
a lot of developers still against the the .net technology, and it is even
cited that Microsoft has gotten cold feet over .net, with there being less
.net technology built into Vista than originally planned.

On one side you have the anti .net people ranting, and on the other there
is the Microsoft marketing machine telling us all how good .net is. Rather
than read the opinions of the respective sides, I'd like to see what the
actual state of play is so far in terms of a rough % of the win32/.net
development split, and how many machines are estimated to have the
framework(s) installed.

So far trying to get an idea of this information appears to be difficult
to come accross.
Click to expand...

I don't know any figures and it probably it will be hard to get figures.
Your best bet might be web stats as they will contain the CLR version when
the browser is IE. As IE has the majority of the Windows browser market this
figure would be quite accurate given a large sampling.

SP
 
Back
Top