Optimizing Performance

  • Thread starter Thread starter Muckeypuck
  • Start date Start date
M

Muckeypuck

Aren't web controls by their very nature bad form? I mean considering
99.9999 percent of the web control examples could be done client side,
wouldnt it be better to do them client side? When i think about all the
asp.net examples ive seen on these boards doing things like hiding panels
etc it gets me wondering if the rules have changed.
have they?

thanks
 
In many cases the time (and therefore money) that you save by developing
with functionally rich web controls can go toward beefier hardware to make
up for the fact that your code might not be 100% optimized.
Or if you prefer to highly optimize your code, there are certainly plenty of
ways to do that. You could use light weight HTML controls instead of web
controls in many cases, and you can often use static HTML instead of label
controls, for a couple examples.
And of course there are all kinds of ways to cache controls and pages and
parts of pages.
So build it quick and dirty or take your time, the choice is yours.
 
Optimization is a balancing act. One always has to balance performance
against cost of development. In other words, optimization can be expensive
in terms of the man-hours expended towards the effort. If run-time speed and
performance were the only issues involved, every time someone wanted to
write an application, they would start from the machine level, and write
their own custom platform to run as fast as possible. Every programmer would
still be writing in assembler. But in the real world, if every program were
written that way, they would all be obsolete before they hit the market. A
good programmer writes the most optimal application he/she can in the amount
of time allotted for the job. Therefore, no Server Control is by its very
nature bad form. It's all a matter of how, when, and why you use them.

--
HTH,
Kevin Spencer
..Net Developer
Microsoft MVP
Big things are made up
of lots of little things.
 
Back
Top