Linked by Eugenia Loli on Thu 9th Feb 2006 22:54 UTC
Permalink for comment 94442
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:15 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:11 UTC, submitted by Drumhellar
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 7:37 UTC
Linked by fran on 05/18/13 1:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 23:35 UTC, submitted by kragil
Linked by MOS6510 on 05/17/13 22:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 22:15 UTC, submitted by Tom
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 17:04 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2005-07-27
Well, you do not have to upgrade because the various frameworks are backwards compatible. That means that all the work that you do today will continue to work tomorrow.
This also means that you can adopt new technologies when you are ready, not when someone tells you that you must upgrade.
The .NET 3.0 stuff is looking interesting, but its intended for early adopters, those which are interesting in providing feedback. you are not forced to use the new features in C#.
So yes, .NET 2 was on beta for two years, which I think is a good idea as many people could provide feedback on the process: what was broken, what could use tuning, which kinds of features were missing. It was a pretty good beta in my opinion.
miguel