I really like the coding features of Core in Visual Studio 2015 but I'm forced to use the older version of ASP.NET Framework because of the high memory requirements of Core.
I coded a fairly basic website with no DB and it ran very well on my Dell PC that has plenty of memory. Then I deployed it to a shared hosting service as this will be a very low traffic website. The hosting service is one that I've use several times for other .Net apps and the performance has always been fine. This time the whole experience was so frustrating and time consuming that I was forced to rewrite the project in the older .Net Framework - which then ran very well on the hosting service. And, I need be quick to add that the support folks at the hosting service were very quick and helpful in sorting out the issues.
The problem is that these shared hosting services can't provide unlimited memory resources for each customer - it's just not financially feasible for the prices they can charge. The plans at this particular company for memory allotment were 100mb, 300mb, and 500mb for their different plans and pricing levels. The mid range (300 mb for about $120 a year) was barely adequate to run my Core app but quickly ran out of memory when I added one other small non-core project. Their more expensive plan for 500mb was outside of my budget for this little project.
After rewriting the Core project in the older version of .Net, my two non-core projects ran very well with no memory issues - I could probably go back to their least expensive plan.
I read a lot of the Core documentation and perhaps I just missed the warnings about this memory issue. Yes, I knew Core took more memory but not to the extent that it was problematic for running on shared hosting services. Had I known this, I wouldn't have gone down the learning path for Core. However, I'm very disappointed that the Core coding features are no longer usable for me - I really did like the coding experience. The deployment experience is a show stopper for me.