Real World Customer Experience in Migrating from .NET Framework 1.1 to 2.0


It has been just over a year since .NET Framework 2.0 \VS 2005 shipped, SP1 is out, and Vista (with built in .NET Fx 2.0 and 3.0 supports) is shipping this month. These factors are driving the next wave of customers is starting to migrate.

If you fall into the category, I encourage you to check out xxx latest post giving some real world experiences migrating from 1.1 to 2.0…

.NET 1.1 to 2.0 Upgrade Post-Mortem

A few other resources he points out that I will highlight

.NET 2.0 breaking changes
Configure your application to run under .NET 2.0

Care to share your experiences? I’d love to hear how it is going…

Comments (7)

  1. Jeff Berkowitz says:

    Brad, thanks for the link.

    We recently converted our WinForms "Smart Client" application to .NET 2.0 and VS 2005.  Our application is much smaller than the one described in the post-mortem (50k to 100k lines of 100% C#) but still nontrivial.  We are a very small group.

    We followed much the same process, using VMWare to do our test builds.  We will also be using VMWare to maintain parts of our source base that is being obsoleted over time and won’t ever move to VS 2005.

    We have two major third-party controls and haven’t had any problems with them so far.  We had to apply the latest service packs, but did not have to do major upgrades on the controls.

    One thing we overlooked was toolware that wasn’t involved in the developer test process.  In particular there a very well-known major vendor of development software for installers whose "11" release doesn’t support .NET 2.0.  We’re now working to take care of that – an oversight but not a major issue.

    Thanks again.

    Jeff Berkowitz

  2. shuggy says:

    OK this is not a comment on Brad but it is a comment on the seeming inability of MS to effectively respond to feedback on bad/missing documentation.

    http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/netframework/aa497248.aspx

    (the Xml Serialization part of the 2.0 breaking changes) *still* doesn’t list a massive breaking change.

    Members marked with Obsolete attribute are no longer serialized even if [Obsolete("", false)] is used.

    Previously Obsolete("", true) uses would cause failure on creation of the XmlSerializer but non error members would be serialized fine. now they just skip the lot.

    For us this was a major pain to debug as there was no documentation about this.

    I have (again) reported this via http://support.microsoft.com/gp/contactusMSDN?sd=msdn and done it non anonymously this time to see if I even get a response. The area where MS can really shine (detailed searchable and up to date documentation) compared to alternate solutions.

  3. BradA says:

    Shuggy — thanks for continuing to push this… I just talked with the folks in charge of docing these breaking changes… we are looking into it now..

    thanks!

  4. Simone says:

    The biggest problem I has was about a small security made to the encoding namespace.

    I discussed it in my blog:

    http://www.codeclimber.net.nz/archive/2007/01/14/Your-encryption-algorithm-may-fail-moving-to-.NET-2.0.aspx

    I also made other migration, but all worked fine: just a lot of changes to make in the code since we wanted to remove all the obsolete warnings.

  5. nparker says:

    Rowan Simpson, development manager of Trade Me, (largest website by traffic in NZ) wrote about their final step to ASP.NET 2.0 last week… http://rowansimpson.com/2007/01/15/aspnet-20

  6. Paul Andrew says:

    With .NET 3.5 being released about the end of the year at the same time as Visual Studio 2008 it’s a