We performed a comparison between Microsoft .NET Framework and Windows Process Activation Services based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, F5, Apache and others in Application Infrastructure."When it comes to the user interface, the context is better than other tools because it is easier to use."
"It facilitated the streamlined scheduling process by amalgamating inputs from various sources, including location data and other systems."
"Microsoft .NET Framework’s most valuable features are web application development, RESTful services development, security, performance, and less memory footprint."
"User-friendly and straightforward."
"The .NET Framework is a very good framework. It does what I need it to do."
"I like that ASP.NET is used for the framework and the core web services."
"The most valuable feature of Microsoft .NET Framework is debugging."
"Firstly, I appreciate the decision to use Microsoft .NET Framework. I find it to be an excellent language, with a history rooted in providing an alternative to Java, albeit with initial challenges. It is gaining popularity and may be voted the most desirable programming language. What I particularly like about .NET is its language efficiency. While C# is the primary language, the platform also supports others, catering to those inclined towards functional programming. Although I started with Shell, I'm still grasping the concept of functional programming. Despite initial reservations about object-oriented programming, I acknowledge its advantages. .NET is a safer option, and despite criticisms, it has evolved over the years. One notable aspect is .NET's transition to an open platform in recent years, distancing itself from being exclusive to Microsoft engineers. I appreciate the versatility of .NET, enabling code production for a wide range of platforms, presenting a strong competition to Java. It allows targeting practically any physical platform, showcasing its flexibility. These qualities contribute to my positive view of .NET, totaling thirteen aspects that I find appealing."
"The most valuable aspect of the solution is the central console, that allows you to see all of the activated and deactivated computers."
"The pricing is a bit expensive."
"The solution could improve by optimizing the memory for better performance."
".NET Is still heavy or dependant on other Microsoft libraries and frameworks."
"The .NET open source community could be larger."
"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."
"This solution should include Power BI so that we don't have to use any third-party tools."
"The integration capability of the product with AI is an area with certain shortcomings, where improvements are required."
"The learning curve could be improved."
"The stability of the solution needs improvement."
Earn 20 points
Microsoft .NET Framework is ranked 4th in Application Infrastructure with 47 reviews while Windows Process Activation Services is ranked 23rd in Application Infrastructure. Microsoft .NET Framework is rated 8.4, while Windows Process Activation Services is rated 4.0. The top reviewer of Microsoft .NET Framework writes "Intuitive, easier to develop, maintain, and migrate from the old framework to newer versions". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Windows Process Activation Services writes "Central console enables us to see all of the activated and deactivated computers but it has poor alerts and frustrating technical support". Microsoft .NET Framework is most compared with IIS, Magic xpa Application Platform, JBoss Enterprise Application Platform, Apache Web Server and WebLogic Suite, whereas Windows Process Activation Services is most compared with IIS.
See our list of best Application Infrastructure vendors.
We monitor all Application Infrastructure reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.