| Groups | Blog | Home |
dotnet ado.net : Shameful design
In all the years I have been using the internet, this is first time that I am venting my anger publicly! So as you can imagine, I am not a happy bunny! We have just come across a new issue in our application which we have traced to DataRow class no longer being marked serialisable in .NET 2.0. Please note that this was not the case in .NET 1.1 !!!! So, we now have to invest time and money to fix this problem, thanks to a design change (or is it a feature) by Microsoft. If anyone in the Microsoft Data Access team is reading the please explain: - why have you broken the design? - when, if ever, you are going to get your strategy right. After all you have enough chances: RDO, ADO, ADO.NET 1.1, ... - how many attempts do you need? I am glad you fixed the perfromance issues in DataTable, but to go and break things at such a fundemental level is inexecusable. Microsoft, or is it Microbodge, wonders why more and more people are moving to Java/OpenSource. Perhaps the OpenSource movement is their much needed wake up call. And I don't think it is just about licensing costs ... A very frustrated customer
Sorry to tell you this, but Microsoft doesn't read these newsgroups. Their
technical support occasionally answers questions for customers paying for that privilege. However, I understand your frustration. Good luck. Robin S. --------------------- [quoted text, click to view] "Amir Tohidi" <AmirTohidi@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message news:C6E64D3A-9067-4325-95B3-170D499F39A2@microsoft.com... > Hi > > In all the years I have been using the internet, this is first time that > I > am venting my anger publicly! So as you can imagine, I am not a happy > bunny! > > We have just come across a new issue in our application which we have > traced > to DataRow class no longer being marked serialisable in .NET 2.0. Please > note > that this was not the case in .NET 1.1 !!!! So, we now have to invest > time > and money to fix this problem, thanks to a design change (or is it a > feature) > by Microsoft. > > If anyone in the Microsoft Data Access team is reading the please > explain: > > - why have you broken the design? > - when, if ever, you are going to get your strategy right. After all you > have enough chances: RDO, ADO, ADO.NET 1.1, ... - how many attempts do > you > need? > > I am glad you fixed the perfromance issues in DataTable, but to go and > break > things at such a fundemental level is inexecusable. > > Microsoft, or is it Microbodge, wonders why more and more people are > moving > to Java/OpenSource. Perhaps the OpenSource movement is their much needed > wake > up call. And I don't think it is just about licensing costs ... > > A very frustrated customer > Amir
You'll have to add this row to a DataTable and serializer this instead...
Not sure but they probably thought serializing a single row was not compelling enough compared with serializing a table holding a single row. Can understand your frustation though. Also expect changes in ADO.NET and other areas in the coming years... "Amir Tohidi" <AmirTohidi@discussions.microsoft.com> a écrit dans le message de news: C6E64D3A-9067-4325-95B3-170D499F39A2@microsoft.com... [quoted text, click to view] > Hi > > In all the years I have been using the internet, this is first time that I > am venting my anger publicly! So as you can imagine, I am not a happy > bunny! > > We have just come across a new issue in our application which we have > traced > to DataRow class no longer being marked serialisable in .NET 2.0. Please > note > that this was not the case in .NET 1.1 !!!! So, we now have to invest time > and money to fix this problem, thanks to a design change (or is it a > feature) > by Microsoft. > > If anyone in the Microsoft Data Access team is reading the please explain: > > - why have you broken the design? > - when, if ever, you are going to get your strategy right. After all you > have enough chances: RDO, ADO, ADO.NET 1.1, ... - how many attempts do you > need? > > I am glad you fixed the perfromance issues in DataTable, but to go and > break > things at such a fundemental level is inexecusable. > > Microsoft, or is it Microbodge, wonders why more and more people are > moving > to Java/OpenSource. Perhaps the OpenSource movement is their much needed > wake > up call. And I don't think it is just about licensing costs ... > > A very frustrated customer > Amir
Ah, Robin is mostly right. The MS folks mostly watch the MSDN forums, but
David Sceppa and other notable Microsofties have contributed here regularly. AFA your frustration, I too think the team makes changes that seem non-sensical from time to time. Sometimes it's to correct a bug (one man's bug is another man's feature). -- ____________________________________ William (Bill) Vaughn Author, Mentor, Consultant Microsoft MVP INETA Speaker www.betav.com/blog/billva www.betav.com Please reply only to the newsgroup so that others can benefit. This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights. __________________________________ Visit www.hitchhikerguides.net to get more information on my latest book: Hitchhiker's Guide to Visual Studio and SQL Server (7th Edition) and Hitchhiker's Guide to SQL Server 2005 Compact Edition (EBook) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- [quoted text, click to view] "RobinS" <RobinS@NoSpam.yah.none> wrote in message news:HImdnfs7N-qRypHbnZ2dnUVZ_sqdnZ2d@comcast.com... > Sorry to tell you this, but Microsoft doesn't read these newsgroups. Their > technical support occasionally answers questions for customers paying for > that privilege. > > However, I understand your frustration. > > Good luck. > Robin S. > --------------------- > "Amir Tohidi" <AmirTohidi@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message > news:C6E64D3A-9067-4325-95B3-170D499F39A2@microsoft.com... >> Hi >> >> In all the years I have been using the internet, this is first time that >> I >> am venting my anger publicly! So as you can imagine, I am not a happy >> bunny! >> >> We have just come across a new issue in our application which we have >> traced >> to DataRow class no longer being marked serialisable in .NET 2.0. Please >> note >> that this was not the case in .NET 1.1 !!!! So, we now have to invest >> time >> and money to fix this problem, thanks to a design change (or is it a >> feature) >> by Microsoft. >> >> If anyone in the Microsoft Data Access team is reading the please >> explain: >> >> - why have you broken the design? >> - when, if ever, you are going to get your strategy right. After all you >> have enough chances: RDO, ADO, ADO.NET 1.1, ... - how many attempts do >> you >> need? >> >> I am glad you fixed the perfromance issues in DataTable, but to go and >> break >> things at such a fundemental level is inexecusable. >> >> Microsoft, or is it Microbodge, wonders why more and more people are >> moving >> to Java/OpenSource. Perhaps the OpenSource movement is their much needed >> wake >> up call. And I don't think it is just about licensing costs ... >> >> A very frustrated customer >> Amir > >
* Amir Tohidi wrote, On 29-3-2007 11:44:
[quoted text, click to view] > Hi > > In all the years I have been using the internet, this is first time that I > am venting my anger publicly! So as you can imagine, I am not a happy bunny! > > We have just come across a new issue in our application which we have traced > to DataRow class no longer being marked serialisable in .NET 2.0. Please note > that this was not the case in .NET 1.1 !!!! So, we now have to invest time > and money to fix this problem, thanks to a design change (or is it a feature) > by Microsoft. > > If anyone in the Microsoft Data Access team is reading the please explain: > > - why have you broken the design? > - when, if ever, you are going to get your strategy right. After all you > have enough chances: RDO, ADO, ADO.NET 1.1, ... - how many attempts do you > need? > > I am glad you fixed the perfromance issues in DataTable, but to go and break > things at such a fundemental level is inexecusable. > > Microsoft, or is it Microbodge, wonders why more and more people are moving > to Java/OpenSource. Perhaps the OpenSource movement is their much needed wake > up call. And I don't think it is just about licensing costs ... > > A very frustrated customer > Amir The problem with serializing a row is that the row itself does not contain column information like types, expressions and other. These are all stored in the DataTable. That is why you can serialize a table (even if it just contains one row) or a dataset, but not the row itself.
Don't see what you're looking for? Try a search.
|
June 2003
July 2003
August 2003
September 2003
October 2003
November 2003
December 2003
January 2004
February 2004
March 2004
April 2004
May 2004
June 2004
July 2004
August 2004
September 2004
October 2004
November 2004
December 2004
January 2005
February 2005
March 2005
April 2005
May 2005
June 2005
July 2005
August 2005
September 2005
October 2005
November 2005
December 2005
January 2006
February 2006
March 2006
April 2006
May 2006
June 2006
July 2006
August 2006
September 2006
October 2006
November 2006
December 2006
January 2007
February 2007
March 2007
April 2007
May 2007
June 2007
July 2007
August 2007
September 2007
October 2007
November 2007
December 2007
January 2008
February 2008
March 2008
April 2008
| home · blog · groups | Questions? Comments? Contact the dn |