Slick-Ticket v2.0 Released

Many improvements across the board, mostly behind the scenes

I am proud to say that I have released version 2 of my open-source trouble-ticketing/help desk system Slick-Ticket. I wasn't initially planning on making a new release, but the program has become suprisingly popular with over 3,000 downloads and an actual (small) community of users which is great!

You can download Slick-Ticket v2.0 if you have never used it before. If you have already been using a previous version, you will need to replace your existing code with the patching program, run it, then download version 2. It does a few database modifications to cleanup the lack of seperation of markup/db which was done very poorly in a rush of the first version. As with any upgrade, I highly recommend you backup prior to running this upgrade!


  • Broke the dbi.cs class up into more discreet classes
  • Renamed many methods properly
  • Removed (non-user-added) markup from any of the database fields
  • Moved some markup from the code-behinid to the .aspx pages
  • Globalized and ready for translation
  • Added ability to possibly delete attachments/comments/tickets in the future
  • Introduced some more dependency injection
  • Code is now much more robust!

Translating an Asp.NET site to Another Language Using .resx Files

translating the .resx files to another language does not require any programming knowledge at all

Translating a properly globalized site in is simple and does not require the least bit of development knowledge... which is good, because most developers I know barely have a grasp on their own [non-programming] language. This post should probably come after one on how to globalize your site, but I have an urgent need to explain how to do this first (someone has volunteered to translate my open-source project Slick-Ticket to Spanish; thanks Victor!).

how does it work?

First of all, you should understand how this actually works, it may make it easier. Every page in a site has access to two types of resources (when I say resources here I am referring to strings, words or phrases): Global Resources, and Local Resources - these resources are held in .resx files. Global Resources are commonly used resources that all pages can see, and Local Resources are resources that only a specific page can see. Each language/dialect has a specific code, which you can see here: Language Codes (you can see your default setting in your browser options, for IE, check Tools->Internet Options->Languages). Each page then has place-holders where it will substitute a specific language's resource if it is available. For example, if your browser's settings are set to Mexican Spanish (es-mx) and you are trying to view example.aspx, will look for the file to fill in the text. If that file is not present, it will default back down to the default resx file which is example.aspx.resx.

simple enough, how do I edit them?

.resx files are just xml files, and can be edited in a text editor, but that can be very confusing and error prone as there is no syntax and/or structure checking. I recommend you use a program such as Visual Studio if you have it, or Visual Web Developer (free) if you don't; alternatively, there are a few more options such as Mads Kristensen's .NET resource editor application for .resx files, and Resx Editor on SourceForge.

Once you have your editor, just go through and edit the column to be translated, and *ONLY* that one column, messing with the key/name field will break the translation completely.

folder structure

This is the only part that might be a bit confusing. Each folder that contains .aspx, .ascx, etc. files (files with words to be translated) will have their own App_LocalResources folder, and in this folder, there will be a corresponding *.aspx.resx file for each file. Also, any additional languages will be held in a folder with the language abbreviation, and a corresponding file for each file as well. For example, in the admin folder shown here, you can see that it has it's own App_LocalResources folder, in that folder is each corresponding default (in blue) .resx file and there is a folder for each additional language. Here you see the en-us folder (English - United States) and in that you see the same .resx file, but each is named *.en-us.resx (in red) instead of just *.resx. This is the same for each folder, so you will see many App_LocalResources folders. If you forget to change any of them, it will be pretty apparent when you run the program and a lot of stuff does not match up.

Then there is the App_GlobalResources folder in the root; the same thing applies here, just do the same and translate the value column.

Remember that will first look for your desired language, and use it if it is there, if not, it will drop down to the default.

a couple notes

A couple things to keep in mind, if you see any html markup (not the best practice, but sometimes necessary), remember this:


Also, if you see brackets with a number in them (i.e. {0}, {2}, etc.), be sure to leave those, the developer is using that as a word placeholder.

that's it

Now, as long as it is available, your users will see your site in their preferred language. It is a bit tedious to translate, but much easier than walking through the markup and screwing things up that way. Also, if a resx file is ever missing, it will not error out, it will simply use the default for any parts that are not available.

Drop all tables in a database with simple SQL

sometimes you just want to drop the tables and leave the DB

This is a very simple and useful bit of SQL shown to me by a colleague. Often times, there are a bunch of foreign keys preventing you form just dorpping tables - it can be a pain to figure out what order you need to delete them in in order to do it correctly. Just run this until all the tables are gone:
exec sp_MSforeachtable "DROP TABLE ? PRINT '? dropped' "

You may see errors, that is normal (you are simply being notified of the foreign keys and such. All the tables will be gone when you no longer see and error messages.

'System.Web.UI.WebControls.ListItem' in Assembly 'System.Web, Version=, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=b03f5f7f11d50a3a' is not marked as serializable

Error drove me nuts... simple solution

You get this error when you are trying to Bind a DropDownList in a GridView, but the problem is that you are using the wrong property to bind it...

instead of:
SelectedItem='<%# Bind("some_value") %>'

use this:
SelectedValue='<%# Bind("some_value") %>'

Simple, but easy to overlook.

No more comments

Back from my month long vacation and I made a decision due to the amount of garbage in my inbox:

I hate to do it, but until I can get some better spam filtering software for BlogEngine, I am turning off comments - the spam levels are just getting ridiculous and wasting too much of my time. If you need to get a hold of me, there is always the contact page.

FormFields for - New Open Source Project

transform and simplify your markup by allowing inclusion of form validation, uniform display, Linq-to-SQL integration and databinding with minimal effort forms are already simple, there are many tools such as DetailsView, ListView, etc. that can make our lives easier, but sometimes they just won't do. In those cases, we have to resort to writing repititous code for forms, that is what FormFields was developed for. Writing markup over and over for things such as validation, regular expressions, dropdownlist databinding, etc gets old really fast, so I developed a way to simplify it as much as possible.

Take for example a date entry field. You have your TextBox, then the CompareValidator to make sure it's a valid date, then a Mask to limit the user's input, a RequiredFieldValidator to make sure they enter something, a WaterMarkExtender to guide the user and finally a CalendarExtender to make input easier.

Now this is great stuff for a UI, and not too hard to write, but when you have to do more and more entry fields such as SSN, phone number, a dropdown, then a CheckBoxList; building forms can quickly become cumbersome and hard to understand, become incredibly tedious and turn into a ton of markup.

This is the markup required to do everything mentioned above:

<div class="form-field">
    <asp:RequiredFieldValidator ID="rfvSchoolDate" runat="server" ControlToValidate="txtSchoolDate" ErrorMessage="Required" CssClass="right validate" Display="Dynamic" />
    <asp:CompareValidator ID="cvSchoolDate" runat="server" ControlToValidate="txtSchoolDate" ErrorMessage="Invalid Date" CssClass="right validate" Display="Dynamic" Operator="DataTypeCheck" Type="Date" />
    School Date
  <asp:TextBox runat="server" ID="txtSchoolDate" CssClass="full" />
  <ajax:MaskedEditExtender ID="meeSchoolDate" runat="server" Mask="99/99/9999" MaskType="Date" TargetControlID="txtSchoolDate" />
  <ajax:calendarextender runat="server" id="calSchoolDate" TargetControlID="txtSchoolDate" Format="MM/dd/yyyy" PopupPosition="TopLeft" />
  <ajax:TextBoxWatermarkExtender ID="tweSchoolDate" runat="server" TargetControlID="txtSchoolDate" WatermarkCssClass="light full" WatermarkText="mm/dd/yyyy" />

All of that can be replaced with just this:

<formField:textBox ID="tb_SchoolDate" runat="server" Type="Date" Required="True" Title="School Date" />

Yes, it is just that easy. The payout and styling is all inherited from a single class and is easy to customize while making for uniform displays. There are multiple different presets for it including SocialSecurityNumber, Date, ZipCode, and a ton more.

This is not only for TextBox fields, it also works for CheckBox, DropDownList, ListBox, CheckBoxList and RadioButtonList. And it not only formats everything the same and takes care of validation (anything that is not automated can be easily added) but it also takes care of databinding as well. Instead of making a datasource, adding an initial entry, binding it to the data and adding a RequiredFieldValidator, you can simply do this:

<formField:dropDownList ID="ddl" runat="server" Title="Category" L2STableName="categories" Required="True" />

No DataSource needed, it is all taken care of within the control itself (this is using Linq-to-SQL and the defaults).

documentation and download

I just wanted to give a quick overview of what it does, I have it fully documented and have more examples here: and it is available for download from CodePlex. I hope some people get some use out of this and I would love if people would want to jump in and add new features.

stuff I still want it to do

It does not render in the designer, and you can't put them into the toolbox - I do not know how to do this just yet, I would love for someone to jump in and help out on this one!

I am taking a much needed 30 day vacation, so no new posts/updates will be happening for a while, but I will be right back to advancing this project when I get back.

Shout it kick it on

IQueryableSearch is now up on CodePlex

another open-source project released into the wild

My IQueryableSearch class has been infinitely useful to me and saved me a ton of time. I have also gotten some good feedback on how useful it is. For those of you that don't know what it does (probably most of you) it is simply a universal search for Linq IQueryable collections; a way to search a bunch of fields/properties on a bunch of objects with one simple interface, like google for your own objects.

With that said, I decided to put it up on CodePlex to better track source code and releases; as just posting them as zips on my blog is a pain when the code is being updated. I am also hoping maybe some of you might want to critique/fix/add to my code to make it better - any interest is appreciated. As always, I hope it helps.

To make it easier it is now available in a dll which you can simply put into your bin, add a:
using Naspinski.IQueryableSearch;

And you are ready to start using it.

On a somewhat related note, I am getting close to releasing another large open-source project I have been working on for quite some time that should prove to save huge amounts of time for programmer - stay tuned!

MCPD 3.5 Certified

took the 70-567 upgrade test today

The test was suprisingly easy compared to the tests required to get the MCPD 2.0. As long as you have been using 3.5 features such as Linq, some WCF, etc. you should be fine in taking it. A lot of the questions weren't even 3.5 specific, many were simple 2.0 stuff that should be trivial if you already have the MCPD.

There were a couple tricky ones that confused me a bit. Whitout getting into too much detail, I will say that there are questions with more than one correct answer, though one may not be as 'ideal' as another, so here you would have to pick the 'most correct' answer. Also, there was a definite typo that threw me off... remember Microsoft: 'asymmetric encryption' is one-way, I think you got mixed up there.

Oh yeah, I passed :)

Asp.Net vs php : speed comparison

why is the myth that php is faster than Asp.Net so prevalent? Asp.Net is faster than php, here are the facts

So many times I have heard php pushers claim that php is so much faster than Asp.Net and that Asp.Net is clunky and slow. The most annoying part is that everything I have read (that is not factless opinion), and I mean everything, says that this is wrong; but for some reason, this myth is widely accepted. It has become a religious argument that ignores the facts.

Instead of arguing this point over and over, I decided to put it here so I can simply refer people to it to set them straight. Keep in mind that I wrote strictly php for over 4 years, it is a great and powerful language that I have nothing against. Not to mention you should not choose your development language by speed, but by what works for you (more on that later). This post is not there to pick sides (though I am now Asp.Net biased of course), just to show the facts.

compiled vs interpreted languages

First of all, at the very base of the argument it has to be realized that the two languages are very different. Asp.Net is an optimized and compiled language, meaning code you enter is reduced to a set of machine-specific instructions before being saved as an executable file. Even if you do not explicitly compile your code before you deploy it, it compiles the first time it is run, then after that it runs as compiled code. Php on the other hand is an interpreted language, meaning it is saved as the code your write and run directly from that code. It is widely accepted and proved many times over that Compiled programs generally run faster than interpreted ones because interpreted programs must be reduced to machine instructions at runtime. Here is a quote from Wikipedia that shows just how much faster they can be: "A program translated by a compiler tends to be much faster than an interpreter executing the same program: even a 10:1 ratio is not uncommon. The mixed solution's efficiency is typically somewhere in between."

the numbers

Now that the theory of why it is faster is out of the way, let's get to some cold hard numbers, so we can put this debate to rest.

The following charts and benchmarks are taken from WrenSoft and quite simply show the difference. Please follow the link if you want an in-depth description of the test.

This first graph shows the time taken to generate and display results for a search a small website.

As you can see, the average time for the php site: 0.1500 seconds, the time for Asp.Net: 0.0150 seconds... that is a HUGE difference, the php search takes 10 times as long! The next one does the same with a larger site, and the results are not much different.

Php took an average of 1.0097 seconds while the Asp.Net run took 0.0810 seconds; php took more than 12 times as long to run, the numbers are there.

Now those tests were run with basically the same code translated into different languages, so there isn't much ammunition in the 'it was coded poorly' argument. But, there is still the [valid] argument that the above tests were run on a Windows machine, and since .Net is native to Windows, it was an unfair trial, so now we will look into the statistics running on Linux, so php will have the 'home-field' advantage; not to mention, c# will be running on Mono.

These benchmarks are taken from who has numerous benchmarks for all sorts of languages and is a fantastic resource. For these tests, I am choosing to compare both vs the baseline of 'Clean' so it is easier to compare; here are the results:

As you can see, even on Linux, .Net is faster across the board; often many times faster. The only other tests I can think would be interesting to run is to compare scalability and such; I would be very interested if anyone has benchmarks for such things.

can we finally focus on what matters?

Go ahead and google vs php speed and you will see that almost all of the posts scream that php is faster, but you will not find any links or evidence backing this up. The whole point of this for me is not even really to show that that Asp.Net is faster, I already knew that; it is to possibly help curb the ridiculous assertions that it is faster. It has basically turned into a religious argument, not a fact based one and that is just silly to me. As in many other things, it seems as if enough people yell something long and hard enough, it becomes 'truth' - it simply is not.

Developing in php is fine, a huge number of amazing applications and websites are written in it by much more skilled coders than myself. That said, you shouldn't choose your language on speed, as development preference is much more important; use php if you feel it is a superior language, but don't push bad information. Most importantly focus on what matters: code in what language you can do your best work in, you don't need to justify it to anyone else, prove that it is faster/better or convert anyone else to using you language - you have better things to do.

But... Asp.Net is faster than php. Period.

Shout it kick it on