Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Programming > ASP .Net > System.Net.Mail versa System.Web.Mail

Reply
Thread Tools

System.Net.Mail versa System.Web.Mail

 
 
Frank
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-27-2007
Hi,

I am hoping to find out the differences between the
System.Net.Mail and System.Web.Mail.

Can some nice folks post the differences; or some urls which show the
differences?

Great Thanks
Frank

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Henning Krause [MVP - Exchange]
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-27-2007
Hello,

in .NET 1.1, only the System.Web.Mail was available. This implemenation had
fundamental flaws. For example, attachment could only be added from files,
not from Streams.

The .NET 2.0 implementation is System.Net.Mail and is much more flexible and
has a richer featureset.

Best regards,
Henning Krause


"Frank" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed) ups.com...
> Hi,
>
> I am hoping to find out the differences between the
> System.Net.Mail and System.Web.Mail.
>
> Can some nice folks post the differences; or some urls which show the
> differences?
>
> Great Thanks
> Frank
>


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
frank
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-27-2007
On Mar 27, 3:59 pm, "Henning Krause [MVP - Exchange]"
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> in .NET 1.1, only the System.Web.Mail was available. This implemenation had
> fundamental flaws. For example, attachment could only be added from files,
> not from Streams.
>
> The .NET 2.0 implementation is System.Net.Mail and is much more flexible and
> has a richer featureset.
>
> Best regards,
> Henning Krause
>
> "Frank" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>
> news:(E-Mail Removed) ups.com...
>
>
>
> > Hi,

>
> > I am hoping to find out the differences between the
> > System.Net.Mail and System.Web.Mail.

>
> > Can some nice folks post the differences; or some urls which show the
> > differences?

>
> > Great Thanks
> > Frank- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -


Hi Mr. Krause,

many thxs

 
Reply With Quote
 
Jay Parzych
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-28-2007
http://www.systemwebmail.com/


http://www.systemnetmail.com/



> On Mar 27, 3:59 pm, "Henning Krause [MVP - Exchange]"
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> in .NET 1.1, only the System.Web.Mail was available. This
>> implemenation had fundamental flaws. For example, attachment could
>> only be added from files, not from Streams.
>>
>> The .NET 2.0 implementation is System.Net.Mail and is much more
>> flexible and has a richer featureset.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Henning Krause
>> "Frank" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>>
>> news:(E-Mail Removed) ups.com...
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I am hoping to find out the differences between the System.Net.Mail
>>> and System.Web.Mail.
>>>
>>> Can some nice folks post the differences; or some urls which show
>>> the differences?
>>>
>>> Great Thanks
>>> Frank- Hide quoted text -

>> - Show quoted text -
>>

> Hi Mr. Krause,
>
> many thxs
>



 
Reply With Quote
 
frank
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-28-2007
On Mar 27, 8:33 pm, Jay Parzych <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> http://www.systemwebmail.com/
>
> http://www.systemnetmail.com/
>
>
>
> > On Mar 27, 3:59 pm, "Henning Krause [MVP - Exchange]"
> > <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>
> >> Hello,

>
> >> in .NET 1.1, only the System.Web.Mail was available. This
> >> implemenation had fundamental flaws. For example, attachment could
> >> only be added from files, not from Streams.

>
> >> The .NET 2.0 implementation is System.Net.Mail and is much more
> >> flexible and has a richer featureset.

>
> >> Best regards,
> >> Henning Krause
> >> "Frank" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message

>
> >>news:(E-Mail Removed) roups.com...

>
> >>> Hi,

>
> >>> I am hoping to find out the differences between the System.Net.Mail
> >>> and System.Web.Mail.

>
> >>> Can some nice folks post the differences; or some urls which show
> >>> the differences?

>
> >>> Great Thanks
> >>> Frank- Hide quoted text -
> >> - Show quoted text -

>
> > Hi Mr. Krause,

>
> > many thxs- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -


great thxs!

 
Reply With Quote
 
=?ISO-8859-1?Q?G=F6ran_Andersson?=
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-28-2007
Actually System.Net.Mail replaces System.Web.Mail, which is now marked
as obsolete.

Henning Krause [MVP - Exchange] wrote:
> Hello,
>
> in .NET 1.1, only the System.Web.Mail was available. This implemenation
> had fundamental flaws. For example, attachment could only be added from
> files, not from Streams.
>
> The .NET 2.0 implementation is System.Net.Mail and is much more flexible
> and has a richer featureset.
>
> Best regards,
> Henning Krause
>
>
> "Frank" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed) ups.com...
>> Hi,
>>
>> I am hoping to find out the differences between the
>> System.Net.Mail and System.Web.Mail.
>>
>> Can some nice folks post the differences; or some urls which show the
>> differences?
>>
>> Great Thanks
>> Frank
>>

>


--
Göran Andersson
_____
http://www.guffa.com
 
Reply With Quote
 
Juan T. Llibre
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-28-2007
re:
> Actually System.Net.Mail replaces System.Web.Mail, which is now marked as obsolete


It's only "obsolete" for the .Net Framework 2.0.
It's still supported in the .Net Framework 1.0 and 1.1.

The correct term when a class works in previous
versions, but not in a later one, is "deprecated".




Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP
asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/
foros de asp.net, en espańol : http://asp.net.do/foros/
===================================
"Göran Andersson" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message news:%(E-Mail Removed)...
> Actually System.Net.Mail replaces System.Web.Mail, which is now marked as obsolete.
>
> Henning Krause [MVP - Exchange] wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> in .NET 1.1, only the System.Web.Mail was available. This implemenation had fundamental flaws.
>> For example, attachment could only be added from files, not from Streams.
>>
>> The .NET 2.0 implementation is System.Net.Mail and is much more flexible and has a richer
>> featureset.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Henning Krause
>>
>>
>> "Frank" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>> news:(E-Mail Removed) ups.com...
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I am hoping to find out the differences between the
>>> System.Net.Mail and System.Web.Mail.
>>>
>>> Can some nice folks post the differences; or some urls which show the
>>> differences?
>>>
>>> Great Thanks
>>> Frank
>>>

>>

>
> --
> Göran Andersson
> _____
> http://www.guffa.com



 
Reply With Quote
 
=?ISO-8859-1?Q?G=F6ran_Andersson?=
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-28-2007
Juan T. Llibre wrote:
> re:
>> Actually System.Net.Mail replaces System.Web.Mail, which is now marked as obsolete

>
> It's only "obsolete" for the .Net Framework 2.0.
> It's still supported in the .Net Framework 1.0 and 1.1.


Obviously, as System.Net.Mail doesn't exist in framework 1.x.

> The correct term when a class works in previous
> versions, but not in a later one, is "deprecated".


The class is marked as obsolete using the Obsolete attribute. The
correct term for a class marked as obsolete is obsolete. You can also
call it "deprecated" as some other systems use that term for the same thing.

An obsolete class is still working, it's only recommended that it's not
used. As the framework is supposed to be able to run code compiled for
previos versions, classes can't just stop working, at least not until
they have been obsolete for some version updates.

>
> Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP
> asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/
> foros de asp.net, en espańol : http://asp.net.do/foros/
> ===================================
> "Göran Andersson" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message news:%(E-Mail Removed)...
>> Actually System.Net.Mail replaces System.Web.Mail, which is now marked as obsolete.
>>
>> Henning Krause [MVP - Exchange] wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> in .NET 1.1, only the System.Web.Mail was available. This implemenation had fundamental flaws.
>>> For example, attachment could only be added from files, not from Streams.
>>>
>>> The .NET 2.0 implementation is System.Net.Mail and is much more flexible and has a richer
>>> featureset.
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>> Henning Krause
>>>
>>>
>>> "Frank" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>>> news:(E-Mail Removed) ups.com...
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> I am hoping to find out the differences between the
>>>> System.Net.Mail and System.Web.Mail.
>>>>
>>>> Can some nice folks post the differences; or some urls which show the
>>>> differences?
>>>>
>>>> Great Thanks
>>>> Frank
>>>>

>> --
>> Göran Andersson
>> _____
>> http://www.guffa.com

>
>



--
Göran Andersson
_____
http://www.guffa.com
 
Reply With Quote
 
Juan T. Llibre
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-29-2007
re:
> The class is marked as obsolete using the Obsolete attribute.


There's conflicting info on that.

See :
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/lib...il(VS.80).aspx

That page says that the classes in the System.Web.Mail namespace have been deprecated,
but all its classes have been marked as obsolete.

The namespace is not obsolete. It's deprecated.
That's because it doesn't work in the current version but works in the previous ones.

See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deprecated
"The deprecated feature still works in the current version of the software,
but it may raise error messages or warnings recommending an alternative practice."

and
http://www.w3.org/TR/WD-html40-970917/convent.html
"A deprecated element or attribute is one that has been outdated by newer constructs."

System.Web.Mail can be thought of as "obsolescent", but not "obsolete", since it still works.

Ymmv, of course.




Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP
asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/
foros de asp.net, en espańol : http://asp.net.do/foros/
===================================
"Göran Andersson" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> Juan T. Llibre wrote:
>> re:
>>> Actually System.Net.Mail replaces System.Web.Mail, which is now marked as obsolete

>>
>> It's only "obsolete" for the .Net Framework 2.0.
>> It's still supported in the .Net Framework 1.0 and 1.1.

>
> Obviously, as System.Net.Mail doesn't exist in framework 1.x.
>
>> The correct term when a class works in previous
>> versions, but not in a later one, is "deprecated".

>
> The class is marked as obsolete using the Obsolete attribute. The correct term for a class marked
> as obsolete is obsolete. You can also call it "deprecated" as some other systems use that term for
> the same thing.
>
> An obsolete class is still working, it's only recommended that it's not used. As the framework is
> supposed to be able to run code compiled for previos versions, classes can't just stop working, at
> least not until they have been obsolete for some version updates.
>
>>
>> Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP
>> asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/
>> foros de asp.net, en espańol : http://asp.net.do/foros/
>> ===================================
>> "Göran Andersson" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>> news:%(E-Mail Removed)...
>>> Actually System.Net.Mail replaces System.Web.Mail, which is now marked as obsolete.
>>>
>>> Henning Krause [MVP - Exchange] wrote:
>>>> Hello,
>>>>
>>>> in .NET 1.1, only the System.Web.Mail was available. This implemenation had fundamental flaws.
>>>> For example, attachment could only be added from files, not from Streams.
>>>>
>>>> The .NET 2.0 implementation is System.Net.Mail and is much more flexible and has a richer
>>>> featureset.
>>>>
>>>> Best regards,
>>>> Henning Krause
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Frank" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>>>> news:(E-Mail Removed) ups.com...
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> I am hoping to find out the differences between the
>>>>> System.Net.Mail and System.Web.Mail.
>>>>>
>>>>> Can some nice folks post the differences; or some urls which show the
>>>>> differences?
>>>>>
>>>>> Great Thanks
>>>>> Frank
>>>>>
>>> --
>>> Göran Andersson
>>> _____
>>> http://www.guffa.com

>>
>>

>
>
> --
> Göran Andersson
> _____
> http://www.guffa.com



 
Reply With Quote
 
=?ISO-8859-1?Q?G=F6ran_Andersson?=
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-29-2007
Juan T. Llibre wrote:
> re:
>> The class is marked as obsolete using the Obsolete attribute.

>
> There's conflicting info on that.


Not at all. It's very simple. There is an Obsolete attribute. There is
no Deprecated attribute. You can mark a class as obsolete, but you can't
mark it as deprecated.

> See :
> http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/lib...il(VS.80).aspx
>
> That page says that the classes in the System.Web.Mail namespace have been deprecated,
> but all its classes have been marked as obsolete.
>
> The namespace is not obsolete. It's deprecated.
> That's because it doesn't work in the current version but works in the previous ones.


That is not correct. The classes still work in the current version.

> See:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deprecated
> "The deprecated feature still works in the current version of the software,
> but it may raise error messages or warnings recommending an alternative practice."
>
> and
> http://www.w3.org/TR/WD-html40-970917/convent.html
> "A deprecated element or attribute is one that has been outdated by newer constructs."
>
> System.Web.Mail can be thought of as "obsolescent", but not "obsolete", since it still works.


I think that you are confusing this with something else. Just because
something is obsolete doesn't in any way imply that it would not work
any more.

> Ymmv, of course.
>
>
>
>
> Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP
> asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/
> foros de asp.net, en espańol : http://asp.net.do/foros/
> ===================================
> "Göran Andersson" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>> Juan T. Llibre wrote:
>>> re:
>>>> Actually System.Net.Mail replaces System.Web.Mail, which is now marked as obsolete
>>> It's only "obsolete" for the .Net Framework 2.0.
>>> It's still supported in the .Net Framework 1.0 and 1.1.

>> Obviously, as System.Net.Mail doesn't exist in framework 1.x.
>>
>>> The correct term when a class works in previous
>>> versions, but not in a later one, is "deprecated".

>> The class is marked as obsolete using the Obsolete attribute. The correct term for a class marked
>> as obsolete is obsolete. You can also call it "deprecated" as some other systems use that term for
>> the same thing.
>>
>> An obsolete class is still working, it's only recommended that it's not used. As the framework is
>> supposed to be able to run code compiled for previos versions, classes can't just stop working, at
>> least not until they have been obsolete for some version updates.
>>
>>> Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP
>>> asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/
>>> foros de asp.net, en espańol : http://asp.net.do/foros/
>>> ===================================
>>> "Göran Andersson" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>>> news:%(E-Mail Removed)...
>>>> Actually System.Net.Mail replaces System.Web.Mail, which is now marked as obsolete.
>>>>
>>>> Henning Krause [MVP - Exchange] wrote:
>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>
>>>>> in .NET 1.1, only the System.Web.Mail was available. This implemenation had fundamental flaws.
>>>>> For example, attachment could only be added from files, not from Streams.
>>>>>
>>>>> The .NET 2.0 implementation is System.Net.Mail and is much more flexible and has a richer
>>>>> featureset.
>>>>>
>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>> Henning Krause
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "Frank" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>>>>> news:(E-Mail Removed) ups.com...
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I am hoping to find out the differences between the
>>>>>> System.Net.Mail and System.Web.Mail.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Can some nice folks post the differences; or some urls which show the
>>>>>> differences?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Great Thanks
>>>>>> Frank
>>>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Göran Andersson
>>>> _____
>>>> http://www.guffa.com
>>>

>>
>> --
>> Göran Andersson
>> _____
>> http://www.guffa.com

>
>



--
Göran Andersson
_____
http://www.guffa.com
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Howto display an ASP.net datagrid rows as columns and vice versa? Jimmy ASP .Net 1 06-14-2005 03:30 PM
Clent can share host files but not visa versa - any ideas? Jon Wireless Networking 1 02-22-2005 11:05 AM
Switching from Ad Hoc to access point mode and visa-versa Laery Wireless Networking 0 01-19-2005 08:29 AM
Switching from Ad Hoc to access point mode and visa-versa Laery Wireless Networking 1 01-18-2005 03:38 PM
Switching from Ad Hoc to access point mode and visa-versa Laery Wireless Networking 1 01-17-2005 03:47 PM



Advertisments