Microsoft .NET Framework Reviews

I use .NET Framework for development because my client uses it. It was already in place when I started the product. They work with .NET because it's mainstream and .NET programs are widely available.

Pre-programmed functions for .NET Framework are widely available.

I would like more web integration.

I have been working with .NET Framework for the past two years.

The framework is stable, but it depends on the size of the application. If it's a larger application running on multiple machines, you may experience issues because it's on Windows, the least stable platform. 

The initial setup is easy, and it takes less than half a day.

I rate .NET Framework seven out of 10. If you are using .NET, make sure your setup meets the requirements because that was an issue that caused a lot of problems.  I would recommend Magic rather than .NET. It takes longer to develop something on .NET. The framework has extensive possibilities, so the learning curve is steep.

I work on the C#, ASP.NET, SQL Server, and others. I am also developing some scripts for my RPA solutions when needed. 

Microsoft .NET Framework has introduced many new features, making the technology very vast. In particular, they have a very good Visual Studio environment to do development.

The solution is not limited in storage, is customizable and simple to use.

I would like to see a better response time from the technical support.

This is a stable solution.

Microsoft .NET is scalable.

My experience with Microsoft technical support is that they can be difficult to reach. The support depends on the contract between the client and the company. 

Positive

Microsoft .NET has both open source and licensing options. Microsoft Framework and Visual Studio are licensed however, they have introduced .NET Core which is open source. In .NET Core, you will find Angular which is open source.

I would rate Microsoft .NET Framework a nine out of 10 overall.

I have built many things in Microsoft .NET Framework. At a high level, the main focus would be on integration.

Microsoft .NET Framework is primarily for the integration of solutions.

It enables us to do rapid development. We can develop solutions very quickly.

It is easy to use, and it runs on a Windows platform.

The .NET Framework is a very good framework. It does what I need it to do.

I have been working with different versions of Microsoft .NET Framework for 15 years.

Microsoft .NET Framework is a stable solution.

It's a scalable product.

In our organization, we have 700 users.

Microsoft technical support is excellent.

The previous solution we used, was also provided by Microsoft and Microsoft retired it.

The installation is straightforward. It's very easy.

It took an hour to deploy this solution.

We have a team of five analysts, and developers to maintain this solution.

Hitachi Consulting and Oracle Consulting have assisted us in other companies.

Microsoft .NET Framework is licensed under the Windows License.

My advice to others would go to get some training. This solution is best used with some training.

I would rate Microsoft .NET Framework a nine out of ten.

I've been using the solution on the Microsoft Platform because it's very tied up with the Windows Server operating system, as it is with the Microsoft technologies. I would basically use the solution anytime that I wished to do something very efficient on Microsoft, building a software for example, which can be done on Microsoft Platform efficiently. I see the solution as the proper alternative to such programs as Java and Python. I prefer Microsoft.NET framework as it's actually tied with the Microsoft operating system and network.

So, the main advantage of the solution for me is that it's really tight. It starts with the component of the server side and proceeds to accessing the database. Work with it is really smooth with Microsoft technologies. There is no worry, no bother. Microsoft technologies is really straightforward.

Microsoft Platform is the only viable solution when I wish to do something that is not supposed to be cross-platform. This was the case later on with the .NET Core. Although we tried to obtain this on the Linux platform, we found things to be somewhat limited, as the .NET Core didn't mix very well with the Linux kernel. This is why we did not adopt it so much on Linux and prepared to do it with Python and Java, as the .NET Core was less powerful than the .NET Framework on Windows. As such, .NET Framework is better to use on Microsoft, on Windows Server. To me, Windows Server is actually the best when one wishes to do something for Windows Server but does not desire that it be cross-platform. It offers much integration. 

While Windows Server is always the best, the interoperability and, of course, cross-platform features could stand improvement. Ideally, the .NET Core should be made more efficient than it is at present. There is a need to be at the level of Java, for example, to truly overcome the weaknesses involved.

Price fraction on the Linux Platform and macOs Platform should also be taken into account. Then it will really be effective on those other platforms. 

It is of great concern to us that the solution is not very powerful on cross platform, at it impedes the ability to build and scale with it. There are many who would like to have their servers on Linux, since hosting Windows Server, even on VPS or in any hosting company, is very expensive. It will also be expensive in the long run. Keeping it secure will be expensive. It is cheaper and easier to get it secured, to get the best performances, with Linux. Most applications that our customer companies are using they wish to have on a server and then to access it from any type of tool, computer, or smartphone, which is what we would like for ourselves at the moment. Many are interested in the type of deployment whereby the application will be set on a server with web services.

For the .NET to really be at the level of some of the tools we are using now, it is better that Microsoft should start on the .NET Core so as to make it as powerful as possible on the main Linux distributions.

This would increase my rating of the solution.

If Microsoft could put the .NET Core at the level of the other platform I would even rate it as a nine out ten.

For the moment I can only give the product a rating of five out of ten since only some of the customers will be satisfied, those that have the financial resources for hosting a platform on Windows Server. They would need to finance a team that would work to keep everything running with security and to be capable of scaling up anytime they want. A dedicated strong team for this purpose costs money. 

While there are those companies that have the money and can afford this expenditure, others that don't will opt for the cheaper solution of using Linux, which has the potential for providing the same results. 

Moreover, I would like to have interoperability with AS400. We have not done many things with the .NET and prefer using certain other tools towards this end. When we want to work on AS400 we need to use some other tools for that on Windows. If Microsoft could resolve this issue it could attract a wider array of customers. We have very powerful software running on AS400, so the its interoperability capabilities are important to resolve.

I have been working with Microsoft.NET Framework for 20 years and I have been doing so since its inception. After having switched to open source I then reverted back to the solution. I have been using it since it came out with its early versions. 

Microsoft has tested the solution and our experience with it has shown us that, while it is not as fast as some of our other software-devoted platforms, it is very stable. It's integrated with the platform and very stable on Microsoft Platform. There are certain applications we build on it which work very well and we do not experience downtime.

The ability to build and scale with the solution is hampered by the absence of its cross-platform capabilities.

There is a need to choose the version being worked on and to obtain its appropriate components, at which point the installation will proceed as it usually does for Microsoft products. This is the point where the person must click repeatedly. The PowerShell commands can then be used. The person is presented with all the other Microsoft questions upon installation. When we work with the Linux system, we primarily prepare for use of PowerShell. 

I rate Microsoft.NET Framework as a five out of ten. 

Our primary use case is custom business applications, Integration services using WCF/Web API.

Using this framework has enabled us to create services out of things things that we used to do manually. Not only has it made our lives easier, but it has increased productivity as well.

The most valuable features for us are web frameworks like MVC, Web API, and WCF.

I would like to see more pre-built features in the MVC framework because as it is now, it's very open and you have to develop your own controls in order to use it. It would be much easier for us if there were more pre-built controls.

There should be more security features included.

The performance should be improved.

The technical support is in need of improvement to make solving issues more efficient.

I have been using the Microsoft .NET Framework for more than 16 years.

This is a very stable solution and we haven't had any issues.

This is a scalable framework but it depends on how you deploy the solution. Because it is a framework and not a product, it will give you options on how to develop your solution. If you develop it in a way that is scalable, then it will be scalable. But if you don't develop it properly then it will not be scalable.

In my previous company, we had approximately ten thousand users.

In my current company, we only use this solution internally. We have fewer than ten people, and they are business users. We do not currently have plans to increase usage but it may happen in the future.

On a scale from one to ten, I would rate Microsoft technical support a seven.

Whenever we are trying to solve issues by dealing with Microsoft, they ask so many irrelevant questions that it delays things.

We are also using WebLogic Suite with SharePoint on the server-side.

The initial setup was straightforward and the deployment took not more than two to three days.

We implemented this solution using our in-house team.

The Microsoft .NET Framework is free of charge, without licensing cost. The only cost is purchasing the hardware that it runs on.

Java SDK. Java SDK is also good but require little bit more effort.

My advice for anybody who wants to use the Microsoft .NET Framework is to have the proper foundation before implementing the solution. This means that they should lay the architecture first, properly, and then develop the solution based on the architecture. Without this, the solution will not be scalable and will suffer from problems in the long run.

This is a good solution but there is always room for improvement.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

We use Microsoft .NET Framework to develop various products, including an ERP system.

The technology is very scalable and accessible to use.

The product could have a better framework for application development. We have used Xamarin technology by Microsoft. It needs to be up-to-date compared to other technologies.

The platform is very stable. I rate its stability a nine out of ten.

We have 20 Microsoft .NET Framework users in our organization. We use it every day. I rate its scalability an eight out of ten.

The technical support services are good.

Positive

I rate Microsoft .NET Framework an eight out of ten.

Our company is a partner with Microsoft and we install the solution for our customers. 

I like that ASP.NET is used for the framework and the core web services. 

There are performance constraints when multiple users are accessing the application and that consumes CPU resources. 

The ASP.NET framework is no longer supported because the new .NET framework has taken over so any core changes require us to redo projects. 

The setup process for on-premises is complex. 

I have been using the solution for ten years. 

The on-premises solution is quite stable. 

The on-premises solution is hard to scale.

The cloud-based solution is easy to scale because you have access to multiple servers and distributed services. 

Technical support is challenging because staff work on shifts in different regions and do not have knowledge about support tickets or what has already been investigated. 

There are costly fees for support based on the level of support ticket such as normal, high priority, and urgent priority. Once you pay for support, you are sometimes routed to another technician and need to explain the issue again which is not efficient. It would be more efficient and cost effective to remain with the same technician throughout the support experience. 

There are complexities and constraints to setup in on-premises environments. The initial setup requires a Windows server and an IIS server so you might experience compatibility issues. The development version and the machine version need to match or you will be required to install libraries and additional framework. You will also need to check routing to ensure it is correct.

The cloud-based setup is easier and less time consuming because all features and libraries are readily available. 

Our company includes 40 skilled engineers who implement the solution for our customers. 

The solution is a bit costly when compared to open source products or open gear licenses. 

I rate the cost a six out of ten. 

I'm an associate professor of computer engineering.

The solution is user-friendly and straightforward. I enjoy using it.  

It's a little difficult to scale this product for large organizations.

I've been using this solution for 10 years. 

It usually takes a few months for each new version to become stable. 

Scalability is a bit messy so we're forced to use different solutions for different clustering. 

We're satisfied with customer service. 

This is a good product and although it's not suitable for everyone, we're able to support various clients who use this. 

I rate this solution seven out of 10.