Why would you use .NET Remoting over WCF?
I understand that WCF has its distinct advantages, but what advantages would .NET Remoting offer you over the more modern WCF technology?
+2
A:
WCF provides the ability to essentially do exactly what .NET Remoting does through the choice of binding you use when configuring your WCF service.
WCF abstracts the idea of a service from the transport technology that is used to implement that service. You can define a WCF service and then change the transport technology used to provide that service through a few simple configuration options, one of these being net/tcp which is essentially the technology .NET Remoting uses.
WCF is more of a replacement for .NET Remoting than an alternative.
Simon Fox
2009-11-09 20:57:18
Didn't exactly answer the question though.
Goober
2009-11-09 20:58:29
Of course it answers the question. I think it is a great answer that explains that WCF is a replacement for remoting than an alternative. Asking to compare WCF and remoting is asking to compare apples to oranges, as WCF does remoting.
Darin Dimitrov
2009-11-09 21:00:23
@Darin - so it's more like comparing apple and apple pie then ... ;)
Philip Wallace
2009-11-09 21:06:52
From what I understand I would say it's more like an apple to an apple dipped in caramel and covered in nuts.
Min
2009-11-09 21:13:22
This is a fine answer. The answer is "you wouldn't, because Microsoft intends you to use WCF over .NET Remoting", which is what Simon answered.
Anderson Imes
2009-11-10 02:03:08
+1
A:
WCF is .NET Remoting's replacement. It can do HTTP based transport and also TCP/IP based tranport, both secure or not secure, (you can plug in to WCF any serializing engine you want) and it's easier to define and maintain. So I don't think .NET Remoting have anything over WCF, maybe it helps you to go deep and low level, but why go the hard way?
Dani
2009-11-09 21:04:57
@Dani: I never used .NET Remoting, but now I want to develop Windows based smart-client application. Should I go with WCF?
RPK
2010-10-28 08:43:08