Peter, The problem is not necessarily about the capability of frameworks to manage updates or side by side execution. 90% of the time problem is about the IT policies of the institutions. If you develop with .NET 4.0, which would require a .net framework 4.0 runtime, you assume that the people using the software would be able to install the runtime, and install the software. many corporate/institutional machines do not allow their users install software. Most of the corporate/institutional IT is running on horribly old software. IT policy is the real issue I was referring to. I don't want to go into a long description of things that went wrong for me in the past, but let me just say that I've personally had enough issues with both Java and .NET deployment and upgrades that makes web based apps a much better option when it comes to this particular aspect of software life cycle.
Regards Seref On Sat, Sep 10, 2011 at 2:18 PM, Peter Gummer <peter.gummer at oceaninformatics.com> wrote: > Seref Arikan wrote: > >> ... ?Unfortunately, most modern >> software development technologies arrive with their own runtimes, >> (.net framework, jre etc) and it quickly becomes a nightmare to deploy >> and update software. > > I'm not aware of any such deployment problems with .NET. I'm sure > there must be some, somewhere, but they must be edge cases. In ten > years of .NET development I haven't bumped into them. Different > versions of .NET sit side-by-side on the same machine just fine; ditto > for DLLs targeted towards different .NET versions. My daily work > involves a .NET 4.0 application that has dependencies on a lot of .NET > 2.0 DLLs; it just works seamlessly. > > - Peter > _______________________________________________ > openEHR-technical mailing list > openEHR-technical at openehr.org > http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical >
