CheapASPNETHostingReview.com | Best and Cheap ASP.NET MVC hosting. ASP.NET MVC is a framework that adds support for the MVC design pattern to ASP.NET. Therefore, in order to really understand what ASP.NET MVC is, you need to first understand what MVC is. MVC is an acronym that stands for Model / View / Controller. MVC is a programming architecture that aids developers with separating different components of an application. Let’s review each component of MVC individually as they relate to ASP.NET MVC.

The Model

The model in an MVC application stores the application data or state of the application. The model is often a database, an XML file, etc. However, because the model is designed to encapsulate the data layer in the application, you will typically not see the data source correlated with the model with regards to MVC.

In an ASP.NET MVC application, the model typically uses LINQ to SQL or LINQ to Entities.

The View

The view is the user interface that your site visitors to see data from your model. In an ASP.NET MVC application, web forms (ASPX pages) are typically used to display the view, but there’s a significant difference between an MVC view’s page and a typical ASP.NET web form. Most specifically, an MVC view doesn’t use the typical postback model and the page lifecycle that you are used to when using web forms doesn’t exist with MVC views.

More Info
You don’t have to use ASP.NET web forms as the view engine for MVC. Check out MVC Contrib on CodePlex for more information.

It’s easy to make the mistake of thinking of the view as the component in MVC that handles user input and controls the interaction with the user. In fact, it’s the controller that takes on this role. The view is strictly limited to displaying data from the model.

The Controller

The controller is responsible for handling the interaction with the user, for communicating with the model, and for determining which view to display to the user. The controller is derived from System.Web.Mvc.Controller.

The controller defines one or more actions that can be invoked using a URL entered into a web browser. For example, consider the following URL:

http://www.mysite.com/products/display/43

A request such as this one would be handed off to the ProductsController where the display action would be invoked. In this particular case, that action might then display a view of product number 43. The routing of the URL to a particular controller is configured using routes that are defined in the global.asax of the MVC application.

Best OFFER Cheap ASP.NET MVC 6 Hosting Get it NOW !!

Benefits of MVC

In order to maintain state in an ASP.NET web forms application, ASP.NET uses encoded data in a hidden form field via a feature called viewstate. Viewstate does pretty well at providing the illusion of a stateful application, but there are times when problems are encountered. For example, in large applications, viewstate can become very large. Large viewstate not only increases your payload across the network, but it can also impact your search engine ranking by pushing readable page content far down in the rendered code.

More Info

The problem of large viewstate was greatly improved in ASP.NET 2.0, and you can expect even more improvements in ASP.NET 4.0.

ASP.NET web forms developers also have to take the page lifecycle into account, and dealing with when to do certain things can be as much or more frustrating than figuring out how to do something. MVC does away with this kind of frustration because it is truly stateless. Postbacks and the web forms page lifecycle no longer exist.

Another advantage when using MVC is that it allows for full control over the rendered HTML. In a web forms application, HTML code is rendered in large part by server controls, and developers have relatively little control over the code that is generated. The HTML code in an MVC view, on the other hand, is entirely controlled by the developer of the view.

MVC also lends itself well to a separated approach to development. One developer can work on the controller class while another developer works on the view. This design methodology also aids in testing. It’s extremely difficult to test one particular piece of a web forms application because of the reliance of all of the other controls on the page and the managed runtime. An MVC application can be tested much more easily and efficiently because the model, the view, and the controller are all separate components.

MVC or Web Forms?

Now that you’ve got a basic understanding of what ASP.NET MVC is and what it offers, you may be wondering if MVC is the way to go with your future ASP.NET applications. Let’s look at a few scenarios that might help you decide if MVC is right for your next ASP.NET project.

Choose MVC if . . .

You are well-versed in the architecture of MVC. If you aren’t comfortable with how to design a controller, MVC probably isn’t a good choice.

You want full control over the HTML that is rendered in the browser and you can afford the development time and overhead to do all of your own markup.

You need to create efficient unit tests for your user interface without the overhead of the entire managed runtime, etc.

You want full control over how your URLs are formed.

Choose web forms if . . .

You are not familiar with designing MVC applications.

You need to minimize development time.

You want a feature-rich user-interface (such as GridViews, etc.) to display data with rich interaction without substantial development investment.

You are already invested in server controls, either from your own development or from 3rd parties.

These are just a few of the reasons why you might choose one framework over another. Obviously, no one can tell you what decision to make for your application. Ultimately, the decision is up to you, but hopefully the information I’ve provided here (along with some good links) will help you to decide as you approach your next project.

CheapASPNETHostingReview.com | If you create a new MVC 6 project from the default starter template, it will contain the following code in the Startup class, under ConfigureServices method:

How to Migrating From ASP.NET Web API 2 to MVC 6

// Uncomment the following line to add Web API servcies which makes it easier to port Web API 2 controllers.
 // You need to add Microsoft.AspNet.Mvc.WebApiCompatShim package to project.json
 // services.AddWebApiConventions();

// Uncomment the following line to add Web API servcies which makes it easier to port Web API 2 controllers.

// You need to add Microsoft.AspNet.Mvc.WebApiCompatShim package to project.json

// services.AddWebApiConventions();

This pretty much explains it all – the Compatibility Shim is included in an external package, Microsoft.AspNet.Mvc.WebApiCompatShim and by default is switched off for new MVC projects. Once added and enabled, you can also have a look at the UseMvc method, under Configure. This is where central Web API routes can be defined:

 app.UseMvc(routes =&gt;
        {
            routes.MapRoute(
                name: "default",
                template: "{controller}/{action}/{id?}",
                defaults: new { controller = "Home", action = "Index" });
            // Uncomment the following line to add a route for porting Web API 2 controllers.
            // routes.MapWebApiRoute("DefaultApi", "api/{controller}/{id?}");
        });

app.UseMvc(routes =>

{

routes.MapRoute(

name: "default",

template: "{controller}/{action}/{id?}",

defaults: new { controller = "Home", action = "Index" });

// Uncomment the following line to add a route for porting Web API 2 controllers.

// routes.MapWebApiRoute("DefaultApi", "api/{controller}/{id?}");

});

Inheriting from ApiController

Since the base class for Web API controllers was not Controller but ApiController, the shim introduces a type of the same name into MVC 6.

Limited Edition !! Super Cheap ASP.NET MVC 6 Hosting only $1

While it is obviously not 100% identical to the ApiController from Web API, it contains the majority of public proeprties and methods that you might have gotten used to – the Request property, the User property or a bunch of IHttpActionResult helpers.

Returning HttpResponseMessage

The shim introduces the ability to work with HttpResponseMessage in MVC 6 projects. How is this achieved? First of all, the Microsoft.AspNet.WebApi.Client package is referenced, and that brings in the familiar types – HttpResponseMessage and HttpRequestMessage.

On top of that, an extra formatter is injected into your application – HttpResponseMessageOutputFormatter. This allows you to return HttpResponseMessage from your actions, just like you were used to doing in Web API projects!

How does it work under the hood? Remember, in Web API, returning an instance of HttpResponseMessage bypassed content negotiation and simply forwarded the instance all the way to the hosting layer, which was responsible to convert it to a response that was relevant for a given host.

In the case of MVC 6, the new formatter will grab your HttpResponseMessage and copy its headers and contents onto the Microsoft.AspNet.Http.HttpResponse which is the new abstraction for HTTP response in ASP.NET 5.

As a result such type of an action as the one shown below, is possible in MVC 6, and as a consequence it should be much simpler to migrate your Web API 2 projects.

public HttpResponseMessage Post()
{
    return new HttpResponseMessage(HttpSattusCode.NoContent);
}

public HttpResponseMessage Post()

{

return new HttpResponseMessage(HttpSattusCode.NoContent);

}

Binding HttpRequestMessage

In Web API it was possible to bind HttpRequestMessage in your actions. For example this was easily doable:

[Route("test/{id:int}")]
    public string Get(int id, HttpRequestMessage req)
    {
        return id + " " + req.RequestUri;
    }
    [Route("testA")]
    public async Task&lt;TestItem&gt; Post(HttpRequestMessage req)
    {
        return await req.Content.ReadAsAsync&lt;TestItem&gt;();
    }

[Route("test/{id:int}")]

public string Get(int id, HttpRequestMessage req)

{

return id + " " + req.RequestUri;

}

[Route("testA")]

public async Task<TestItem> Post(HttpRequestMessage req)

{

return await req.Content.ReadAsAsync<TestItem>();

}

The shim introduces an HttpRequestMessageModelBinder which allows the same thing to be done under MVC 6. As a result, if you relied on HttpRequestMessage binding in Web API, your code will migrate to MVC 6 fine.

How does it work? The shim will use an intermediary type, HttpRequestMessageFeature, to create an instance of HttpRequestMessage from the ASP.NET 5 HttpContext.

HttpRequestMessage extensions

Since it was very common in the Web API world to use HttpResponseMessage as an action return type, there was a need for a mechanism that allowed easy creation of its instances. This was typically achieved by using the extension methods on the HttpRequestMessage, as they would perform content negotiation for you.

HttpError

If you use/used the CreateErrorResponse method mentioned above, you will end up relying on the HttpError class which is another ghost of the Web API past rejuvenated by the compatibility shim.

HttpError was traditionally used by Web API to serve up error information to the client in a (kind of) standardized way. It contained properties such as ModelState, MessageDetail or StackTrace.

It was used by not just the CreateErrorResponse extension method but also by a bunch of IHttpActionResults – InvalidModelStateResult, ExceptionResult and BadRequestErrorMessageResult. As a result, HttpError is back to facilitate all of these types.

best asp.net mvc tutorial

Cheap ASP.NET Tutorial – What is ASP.NET MVC and Why Should I use it?