--- Anne Thomas Manes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > There is a significant barrier to adopting WCF -- it requires > deployment of the .NET 2.0 framework on all systems that use it. It > will be a while before .NET 2.0 is pervasive on servers -- not to > mention desktops. WCF requires Vista, XP, or WinServer2003. That's > why > so many people are still using ASP.NET with (or without) WSE 2.0 > (which uses .NET 1.1).
To me, the issue isn't so much .NET 2.0 (it's been out for over a year, which is about as much time as it takes for enterprises to feel comfortable deploying new applications with a new Java SE release). It's, as you suggest, the operating system requirement for WCF. To me, .NET 2.0 and WSE3 are good enough candidates for new systems that must stay on Win2K, and I would be very hesitant to recommend .NET 1.1 and WSE2 except in maintenance mode. It's a dead end, and there's little reason to avoid .NET 2.0 on Win2K for new deployments. I do see a growing amount of Win2K3 for new deployments, and there it's mostly a toss-up of the learning curve & risk tolerance to move directly to WCF over WSE3. Cheers Stu __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
