views:

122

answers:

3

When ASP.NET came out people started referring to ASP 3 (and below) as classic ASP. Does anyone do this when refering to ASP.NET (non MVC) in relation to ASP.NET MVC?

It seems awkward when answering questions refering to normal ASP.NET as the "non ASP.NET MVC ASP.NET!"

Please don't explain the differences between the two- I know that and that is not the question!

+3  A: 

It's either just "ASP.NET" or "WebForms"

bdukes
Web forms is what I think I will refer to it as. ASP.NET is now ambigious, when discussing both technologies.
RichardOD
+3  A: 

ASP.NET = WebForms and MVC. WebForms is the "classic" while MVC is the new big thing.

TheTXI
And MonoRail and any other ASP.NET powered technology.
RichardOD
Using the classic word will cause confusion here :)Although I get what you mean
The real napster
It seems to me that "classic" is a bit of a loaded term. To me, that implies deprecation, which according to the MS ASP.NET team, is not the case.
Matt Peterson
Matt- that's a good point. It seems a better word for classic in this case would be "traditional"
RichardOD
+6  A: 

ASP.NET is the umbrella term for both. The non-mvc is just called "WebForms"

ichiban
I will now refer to it as "ASP.NET Web Forms", something which seems obvious but I hadn't thought about it before!
RichardOD
Interestingly I've received the book Pro ASP.NET MVC Framework. Steven Sanderson refers to it as "traditional ASP.NET, also known as WebForms"
RichardOD