Re: what's the differents between MFC Wnd && .net winform??

Tech Tip: Click here to run a free scan for Windows Errors and optimize PC performance

I started with Microsoft C 3.0. 7.0 was a distinct improvement.

When I was working on an IBM RISC 6000 system back in 1990, the C compiler was bug-ridden,
the debugger didn't work, and there was no source debugging. So I developed all my code
under Microsoft C using CodeView (and dual monitors!) and then ported it to the RISC6000.
What was fascinating was my 33MHz 386 could compile faster than the RISC6000, the compiler
(which was C7, as I recall) had no bugs, and I could do source debugging. I annoyed all
my colleagues by avoiding all the cool stuff they had done to use a (gack!) *Microsoft*
product.

[One of the things they were proud of was the version of the X server that would run with
color displays. It only took 15 seconds to drop down a menu, and they thought this was
acceptable! I was running on Windows 3.0 at the time, which ran on VGAs in the same 8-bit
color they were supporting, and it dropped down menus so fast you couldn't actually see
the delay. What I find odd about the latest systems is that pointless animations whose
purpose is to delay things gratuitously seem to be added. The first thing I do is turn
all this crap off). I find it fascinating that programmers are working hard to make us
LESS productive so they can show off their animation skills]
joe
On Fri, 27 Apr 2007 11:52:51 -0700, "Tom Serface" <tom.nospam@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

OK Ajay, now there you go trying to make MFC look older than it really is...
I think the first "usable" version was with Visual C++ in 1993. :o) We
don't want to remember C/C++ 7.0. Yuck.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Foundation_Classes

Tom


"Ajay Kalra" <ajaykalra@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1177689844.605238.265550@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Apr 24, 3:36 pm, "Ramon Chen" <R...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Seems .net winform can do everything those MFC can does...
So why we still using MFC today?
What's the main differences??


.Net is much newer technology than MFC. MFC replaced pure Win32 in
late 80's early 90's. It made life of a Win32 C programmer easy and
productive. MFC is a framework and provides doc/view (MVC)
architecture. Its all C++. .Net on other hand, provides almost all the
Win32 functionality in a consistent fashion (all classes) and supports
multiple languages. Its also managed (MFC is native or unmanaged). If
you dont have the need for doc/view and dont care about not using C++,
go with .net and C#.

---
Ajay

Joseph M. Newcomer [MVP]
email: newcomer@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Web: http://www.flounder.com
MVP Tips: http://www.flounder.com/mvp_tips.htm
.

Quantcast