다음을 통해 공유

What is the value of .NET 3.5 vs. .NET 2.0? Well, that depends on you...

  • 아티클

Occasionally someone will say to me something along the lines of:

"I've got an old VB6 app that I need to migrate. Why should I use .NET 3.5 instead of .NET 2.0? What's the value proposition? The ROI?" 

If you've ever wondered about that question, (at the suggestion of Josh Holmes), here are my 2 cents: 

The question has an answer, but the answer depends very much you... that is, on the details of your specific business needs.  It's tough to make a case for one framework version over another that applies generically.  

The reason for this is quite simple:  The added capabilities of .Net 3.5 do things (and help devs and ultimately users, do things) that .Net 2.0 does not.  So the question becomes, are those incremental capabilities useful, valuable in your specific context?  

For example:

  • Do you want a rich UX?  Well, you can do a lot more/better with WPF or Silverlight.  What is that worth?  Depends entirely on you and your scenario.
  • Should the app be web, client, or XBAP? 
  • Does the app need secure, reliable web services?  WCF makes that a lot easier.
  • What kind of work flows should they have?  Windows Workflow certainly makes it easier for workflows to span productivity, smart client, and web applications, and be exposed via services. 
  • What are the consuming interfaces?  Should there be an Office UX for some part of this app?   Or for some class of users?  It’s faster, easier with VSTO 3. 
  • What is the lifetime of this app?  What is the upgrade path?  Would you benefit from .Net 4 a couple years from now? 
  • How fast is your business moving?  Can you accurately predict what you'll want this app to do 5 years from now?  
  • Does your app rely on or contribute to data exchanged between companies?  Would that be valuable in the future?
  • Etc.  

Sometimes folks simply want to port a VB6 app to a supported tooling platform as cheaply as possible, without improving the capabilities or UX of their users and without any consideration of future capabilities.  In these instances, it may be tough to make a case for .NET 3.5 that folks get excited about.  I certainly understand the organizational pressures and incentives that drive this situation.  Although I'm sympathetic about the pressures, this path is often a path of sub-optimization. 

While the cost to purchase extended VB6 support is high, I believe that IT shops do best when executive management views the migration imperative as an opportunity to better serve the business vs. a cost to be born.  The reality is that the dollars spent are an investment regardless of mind set -- the question is, given the fact that folks will need to re-work the old VB6 app in any case, how much return will they get?

As I said, that's my 2 cents.  Agree or disagree? 

Also, you can learn more about .NET 3.5 and how it compares to .Net 3.0 and .Net 2.0 here.  

Technorati tags: .NET 3.5, VB6 migration, Value of .NET

Comments