Suhmaamiar wrote:
many thanks but i am still interested in asp .net
based design ;D
I think what Tom wanted to know was why you wanted reinvent the wheel; it was just a matter of snoopy curiosity, as recreating something 'just like' one that exists already, but in a different implementation language, is a pointless exercise unless there were a specific reason for it. Given that these message boards are not trivial to implement (not a major project, but not a quick hack either), you would have to have some fairly good reasons to do so.
Were you looking to do it as practice at ASP .NET, or did you have some particular .NET functionality that can't be done otherwise? Or some other purpose? That was, I think, the thrust of Tom's posting.
Don't feel obligated to answer; as long as your reasons are enough for you, that should be enough for the rest of us. However, I doubt you'll find many here have much experience with .NET applications, at least not yet.
Also, if your are doing it just for the sake of doing it in .NET, with no other purpose than to have a .NET implementation, I would dissuade you from it. The biggest annoyance I have with many companies in general and Microsoft in particular is that they bandy about the names of their implementation tools or philosophies as buzzwords ("Our new frammistat is OBJECT ORIENTED!!!") in advertising aimed at general consumers, for no reason other than to obfuscate and confuse the real technical issues. Who
cares how a program was written, as long as the best possible job was done to make it usable, stable, secure and efficient (in that order of importance, for most casual users)? How does .NET make Word any better, from the perspective of, say, a paralegal typing out a contract? Or PhotoShop from the perspective of a graphic artist? They could be coded in Intercal for all any of the users could care!
The only people for whom the implementation languages, tools and paradigms are important are the programmers who actually had the job of implemented it, and to a lesser extent, those who need to interface with it later. The casual user neither understands nor cares those issues, and indeed should not have to, so long as the program meets their needs with as few glitches as possible. Making a big deal of it like that is pure cybercrud.
