S. Devasundaram said
This book is THE book from which I learnt .Net . I worship this book for all its contents, well laid out and concepts explained in developer-to-developer terms. This is the best book I have read so far in .Net . A definite yes on this book. You dont have to think twice to buy this book.It's worth every dollar. A very good book overall.
Rui Jiang said
And this is one of them. There are classic books in every area. This book is the one for .NET. If you are an experienced developer and want to jump start with .NET, this is definitely the book for you. I love it! Thank you Jeff Prosise for your great work.
Anonymous said
I was somewhat disappointed with this book. I felt it could have been a bit more in-depth and maybe more focused by removing the section on windows forms and concentrating purely on ASP.Net (and renaming it ASP.Net). One feature that really annoys me and is commonplace in ASP.Net books is how the author states the obvious that codebehind is a great feature and should be utilised, and nesting code in aspx pages avoided if at all possible. Then all the examples are shown as aspx pages containing nested code blocks. Arrgghh!
On the good side Jeff Prosise has a good clear writing style, his description of 'background info' is good, and the book is really well presented in choice of fonts, layout etc. Also it's good that the examples are in C# only.
Mr. Raymond Ovanessian said
This is much more than an okay book. It's simply the very best "programming" book on .NET. Once you've learned your .NET language of choice, which really should be C#, then you need a book like this one to explore and understand the .NET Framework. Trust me, you will not find a better one. I know, I've tried at least 6 other books of this scope. Yes, it does concentrate much more ASP.NET, so much so that I consider it also the best ASP.NET book out there. It's obviously not an advanced-level book, so you'll need to explore the subject further.
The main reason I like this book is because the writing is just so crystal clear and well organized. This author knows how to teach. Concepts flow from general to details superfluously. And the examples are so well chosen that it's a pleasure to read.
After having bought, and read or reviewed a good number of books on .NET, I feel I have a good sense as to which are the very best. The following four books are what I consider to be the creme de la creme of .NET publications:
1) C# Primer Plus, should be your first read;
2) This one, should be your second read;
3) Microsoft .NET for Programmers, read this after you've explored the framework further;
4) Programming .NET Components, the deepest clearest book on .NET I've seen by far - intermediate-advanced.
There are other excellent .NET books. I could name at least 8 others that deserve 4 to 5 stars. The above 4 deserve 5 star ratings more any other, or at least I've not found any others that use C#.
Terry Smith said
Jeff Prosise has been around the Microsoft world for a long time. If you've been around awhile, you might recognize him as the author of Programming Windows with MFC or from several of his other books. This book, as expected, is very well-written and a technically accurate book. Unfortunately, it only musters a rating of three stars because it tries to cover too much. If you want a broad overview of .NET, then this is an excellent book for you. My problem with the book is that its first three chapters on .NET fundamentals don't cover the basics as deeply as I think developers should know them. The single chapter on Windows Forms that follows next is, frankly, completely useless. The next seven chapters (Part 2 of the book) do a very decent job of covering ASP.NET. If anything, this is a badly named book. It should be called Programming Microsoft ASP.NET. Part 2 is followed by a single chapter on ADO.NET. I recommend Mike Gunderloy's book for ADO.NET. Next are single chapters on XML, multithreading, and remoting. All in all, it's a good overview and a decent ASP.NET book (you'll still need another book or two on the topic).
Comments