.NET 2.0 an overhaul change of .NET 1.1?

Question

Is .net 2.0 an overhaul of .net 1.1? in other words if you are let's say following a book written for .net 1.1 (ASP.NET 1.1/C# 1.1) then do you have to "unlearn" something which is totally different in advance versions such as 2.0 3.5?

I am reading a book by Richter "Applied .net framework programming", that's why I wanted to know some points from experienced folks.

Answer 1

For the most part, what you would learn in a .NET 1.1 book applies to .NET 2 (and .NET 3.5/4). The one major exception, and the reason I never recommend anybody start with .NET 1.1 now, is generics.

The handling of collections was made dramatically better in .NET 2+. Prior to .NET 2, collections were all not type safe (ie: ArrayList). After .NET 2, we had the ability to use type-safe, generic based collection classes ( List<T> , so you can do List<int> , etc).

This dramatically changes how people write code (or should!). I'd strongly recommend starting with a .NET 2+ book to learn today. Learning from a .NET 1.1 book will teach you bad habits, because you'll be learning collections that have almost no purpose in current .NET code.

That being said, .NET 4 is now released, and there's no real reason not to start there, if you can...

Answer 2

It is a significant change from 1.1 to 2.0. 2.0 introduced generics as well as new classes to deprecate and replace functionality offered by older 1.1 classes. It would still be good to know 1.1 code and objects, because you'll still see them in the wild, but I wouldn't base my beginner's knowledge upon a 1.1 text. Keep in mind, .NET is now up to 4.0, so even starting at 2.0 would be behind the times, but not nearly as bad as 1.1.

I would find a resource that at least covered C# 3.0/.NET 3.5, and sprinkle in knowledge of 1.1 as needed.

Answer 3

There are a few libraries that were 'overhauled' and some that were deprecated. We are at .net 4.0 by the way.

Here is a list of changes that were blogged on MSDN http://blogs.msdn.com/b/brada/archive/2005/11/14/breaking-changes-between-net-framework-1-1-and-2-0.aspx

Answer 4

.NET 2.0 introduced a lot of new functionality. Specifically for ASP.NET the inclusion of datasource controls, the provider model, sitemaps, ... were introduced.

If you want to learn ASP.NET now or will buy a book I suggest you rather look for something about 2.0 or 4.0. Preferably the latter if possible.

Since 3.5 Ajax and several related controls for that got introduced with the framework, you could add an extension to 2.0 if needed. That's a major improvement to the whole ASP.NET framework as well so be sure to check that out as well.

Answer 5

It's not a complete "overhaul" but there are significant changes. Much of what you learn will carry over but why not just learn the latest version?

Answer 6

For the most part MS did not make that many breaking changes between 1.x and 2.0. 3.0 and 3.5 are library released that just extended the 2.0 runtime with things like LINQ, WCF, WPF and WF. 4.0 has many breaking changes does to a reorganization to support the Client Profile (the libraries avilable on a cutdown client like the Windows Phone) vs the full profile (what you would run on a server).

@Zai based on your comment I have always found the Programming C# series a great survey of what exists within C# and the .NET Framework.

Answer 7

In general, .NET 2.0 is a superset of what is implemented in .NET 1.1. A few functions in 1.1 may have changed in 2.0, and some classes may have been deprecated, but on the whole you shouldn't have to "unlearn" anything. You will have a lot of new stuff available to learn, but you can write code that compiles to the 2.0 framework using your existing 1.1 knowledge and skill set.

Answer 8

If you have a 1.1 book just burn it. Why bother, go read the MSDN and learn your generics, extensions, and lambdas up front. Sorry don't burn it, recycle it, cut the binding off and put it in a printer tray.

Answer 9

Microsoft has always been releasing platforms which are backward compatible. Given the fact that we are already on 4.0 version of the framework, I would suggest starting with 2.0 framework as most of the books would cover the basics which almost remain the same. The exclusions would be things like Generics as mentioned above.

I wouldn't suggest directly jumping onto 3.5 or 4.0 framework as there will a learning curve involved in getting to know the specifics related to those framework.

Answer 10

.NET Framework 1.1 is almost seven years old. I recommend you discard your .NET 1.1 book, even though it's from a great author. Don't bother learning .NET 1.1 at all.

Even to the extent that there are parts of .NET 1.1 that have not changed in all this time, the way things aer done in .NET has changed dramatically in the intervening years. Generics, LINQ, WCF and many more things make the entire mindset very different between .NET 1.1 and .NET 4.0. A book written for .NET 1.1 will be teaching you to think the wrong way about things, and you'll be very surprised when you find other developers asking you "why did you do it that way?"