41–50 of 99 posts
As others have noted, it sounds like it might truly be free now, however Microsoft has always made me nervous with “embrace extend extinguish”[1].
Also I just love using Linux for my servers.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguis...
Our legacy web app uses ASP.NET MVC which is a bit of a pain from a DevOps perspective since it has to run on Windows servers. We also use SQL Server which end up costing 2X what MySQL or PostgreSQL would on RDS. However, our newer code is .NET Core, and we run it on AWS Lambda. We decided to stick with C# since our dev team knows it, and it's a great language. I also really like the direction MS is headed right now with their focus on developers. We have decided to switch to PostgreSQL with our newer services for the cost savings, advanced monitoring, and scaling offered on Aurora. I'd still recommend SQL Server though. It's simple and easy to use in general.
We're a bit of an atypical startup. We are based in Missoula, MT. If you are into .NET, we're hiring - send me an email (it's in my profile).
>What are you thoughts as to why .NET hasn't taken off at startups? To echo what others said... A lot of hot startups are founded by young college kids. They don't have money for expensive Visual Studio licenses to program in C# and .NET world. In contrast, the alternative dev tools like Java, Ruby, PHP were free. In college classes, they would have played around with free software instead of Microsoft. Microsoft cha…
> To echo what others said... Your post doesn't do that. Most other posts name other reasons (potentially legitimate ones), your "it is expensive" justification is inaccurate and doesn't echo most posts here. > Microsoft charged money in multiple areas of the stack: the compiler (VS) cost money, the database (MS SQL Server) cost money, and the operating system (Windows licenses) cost money. The C# compiler is free an…
with the focus on today. A significant amount of infrastructure you just named is merely a few years old, and understandably hasn't made it into most companies.
Might depend on the country but I know a lot of startups that use it because they learned it at school.
>What are you thoughts as to why .NET hasn't taken off at startups? To echo what others said... A lot of hot startups are founded by young college kids. They don't have money for expensive Visual Studio licenses to program in C# and .NET world. In contrast, the alternative dev tools like Java, Ruby, PHP were free. In college classes, they would have played around with free software instead of Microsoft. Microsoft cha…
> To echo what others said... Your post doesn't do that. Most other posts name other reasons (potentially legitimate ones), your "it is expensive" justification is inaccurate and doesn't echo most posts here. > Microsoft charged money in multiple areas of the stack: the compiler (VS) cost money, the database (MS SQL Server) cost money, and the operating system (Windows licenses) cost money. The C# compiler is free an…
So in the good spirit of acknowledging others who posted similar comments before me, I get nitpicked?!?
- hours before me... look for word "money": https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20256086
- hour before me... look for word "budget":: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20256682
- 9 minutes before me... look for word "expensive": https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20256765
- 5 minutes before me... look for word "costs": https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20256788
>For $0. Today.
Yes I also mentioned that tools are free today. My comment was about how the past has a ripple effect on culture of startups avoiding the Microsoft tech stack. This is still in effect today. I would guess than 90+% of YC startups in 2019 are still not choosing the Microsoft stack. It doesn't matter to those founders that .NET Core and VSCode are free today.
There has always been a dark horse OS within .NET its called F#. But what is sad about the state of the average C# dev is that when I ask them about their opinions on F#, they always respond with a "whats F#?" That's the problem with most .NET developers. They were fed straight from the MS spoon with blinders on, and never wondered what is out there. But to label oneself as a "I'm a .NET dev", and yet you don't know…
As someone well versed in C#/VB please ELI5 why F# is so superior to it's OO cousins?
Seems to me like it's actually more difficult to get to the same results with functional languages especially when C# has a lot of "functional" paradigms included?
There has always been a dark horse OS within .NET its called F#. But what is sad about the state of the average C# dev is that when I ask them about their opinions on F#, they always respond with a "whats F#?" That's the problem with most .NET developers. They were fed straight from the MS spoon with blinders on, and never wondered what is out there. But to label oneself as a "I'm a .NET dev", and yet you don't know…
My belief might be outdated. But don't we need to pay for Windows server license per machine?