Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: (No) Microsoft based start-ups?

news.ycombinator.com

121–130 of 148 posts

Re: Ask HN: (No) Microsoft based start-ups?

#121
Wishpot ( http://www.wishpot.com/ ) is ASP.NET/C#-based.

It's quite a good platform (performance and tooling in particular, LINQ is also an impressive technology). But truthfully I wouldn't recommend it. Other platforms excel in other areas, and the Microsoft community culture is nowhere near as "sharing friendly" as the open source communities. Finding good developers is harder (it doesn't have the geek cred to attract hackers). Your deployment options are more limited (can't just get a cheap shared host to get started). Writing C# is about as enjoyable as writing in Java. (Take that as you will... but to me that's a slight negative).

If you were starting from scratch, the reasons to choose a Microsoft platform are not very compelling. You can still create great, fast, performant products - but you can do that on any of the major platforms.

Re: Ask HN: (No) Microsoft based start-ups?

#122

Going away from MS platforms by startups is due to cost and quality (of developers). Annoyances with the latest MS Platforms: - Nasty URLs (capped, trailing file types) - although it can be done with IIS7 routes or preferrably IIRF which runs IIS5-current. They still dont' have a mod_rewrite solution unless you run server 2008 with IIS7. Look at how nasty this looks: http://www.ferrari.com/Italian/Pages/Home.aspx , w…

This is a load of shit. 1. ASP.NET MVC2, which is what they're trying to replace Webforms with, doesn't have any URL mangling issues given that the pathing is determined entirely by the developer's architecture. 2. Yeah, a view needs to contain a .ASPX file - this is an issue because? 3. You can't figure out how to edit some basic configuration settings, therefore the technology failed? Having consumed more than my f…

OK I was going to delete my response just so I didn't have to do this but here we go. Let me first just say I did .NET since 2001 first beta and for 8+ years after that. I bailed mentally to other frameworks around 2005 while in SOAP hell. I do primarily Python frameworks, Ruby or PHP but still do some .NET mainly Mono. I really like C# but disagree with the direction of most Microsoft culture decisions. I was MCSD in C++, C# (first 5000) and was an advocate of the platform from 2001-2005. So this is coming from a .NET dev.

1. Yes it does. It defaults all models, views, routes to capitalized names like CustomerProduct rather than customer-product which is much better for urls and keywords. You even have many lower level .NET dude with /Member in all their urls because they can't abstract away from the physical folder hierarchy.

2. Everything should be ashx or handler based like a good framework, if you need a view you call in the view or template handler like every other framework. Microsoft wires it to aspx pages by default which the Page model is bulky if not needed such as for a REST endpoint.

3. Yes I can. Everyone else if you have worked on a multi-year project in .NET of any scale you will know this configuration hell I am talking about. It is the one that Java has been in for some time. btw I agree on JSON.NET there should be more simplified frameworks like it. I use it in my .NET MVC.

4. All I am saying is typical MS developers dont' venture out, you may. Try pushing JSON or YAML before MS blessed it with a big arse WCF framework and you will see. Even try pushing anything not pushed by microsoft to see what I mean. Heck try this today by pushing a better MVC than ASP MVC to your MS platform developers and see what happens.

5. VB.NET, what is wrong with it? Everything is backwards, it is overly verbose, it mangles the idea of indexors with methods (i.e. [] vs. ()), you have to write 'End Function' (but their tool does that for you) Ok no need to go on here... I do like the behind the scenes compilation and way back in 2001 this was a competitive benefit. Other than that VB.NET is horrible for anyone looking to code ANY other language.

6. Every poorly written .NET project has Datasets that make it all the way to the presentation layer to bind to some default GridView. Laziness and not good software engineering. MS made it too easy there.

7. Try doing any of those things manually or customized. The tools are sugary goodness that hide the complexities of the operation. Most likely there will be a default fail somewhere along the lines on any application of scale. And it is keeping most from learning key elements of deployment on a larger scale.

8. Java and .NET are the biggest platforms, by mere probability they attract more mediocre devs looking for a safe harbor of a job security. There are plenty of good .NET devs but they get lost and lose the ASP MVC, Sharepoint, MS SQL only battles and move on.

9. We can agree, it is an abomination.

I like Microsoft, but they are killing their platform by trying for developer lock in in all the wrong ways.

Re: Ask HN: (No) Microsoft based start-ups?

#123
post #87
post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You should factor in not only license cost, but the total cost of maintaining and properly patching (as well as the mandatory unscheduled downtime that brings) a Windows stack. Even if they give you the licenses for free, it's much more expensive.

There is no mandatory unscheduled downtime. Pure FUD. I install updates when I want and if I wanted, without downtime with some basic load balancing.

Really? For how long do you hold off updates that fix zero-day remote exploits?

Re: Ask HN: (No) Microsoft based start-ups?

#124
post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no mandatory unscheduled downtime. Pure FUD. I install updates when I want and if I wanted, without downtime with some basic load balancing.

Really? For how long do you hold off updates that fix zero-day remote exploits?

As little as possible. And again, in a high-availability infrastructure I can patch each machine without downtime. I was contending your point that the downtime was mandatory and unscheduled. Windows never forces you to update at any time. It strongly suggests, sure. By default, the option is auto-update, but that's configurable and not required.

Re: Ask HN: (No) Microsoft based start-ups?

#125
post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think it's just a matter of fashion. Only a handful of the startups we've funded use anything from Microsoft.

That doesn't discount the idea of fashion. YC attracts a certain crowd of applicants that tend to be younger and more closely tied into the emergent technology trends. If they have the time to take X months off of their jobs and their families, they also probably have time to learn new technologies that they didn't use in school or at work. I'm young enough but with a busy full time job and a toddler, learning new te…

> I know better than to expect to converse about our MS technology with the HN crowd, though.

I'm not sure why. People talk about Clojure and Haskell and I'd bet good money that those are even less common for startups — heck, probably fewer people here can even read them. I don't personally like the Microsoft stack overall, but I do think some of the stuff they make is pretty compelling and it would be interesting to hear how it's used outside of a BigCo.

That could just be me, though.

Re: Ask HN: (No) Microsoft based start-ups?

#126
post #46
post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think it's just a matter of fashion. Only a handful of the startups we've funded use anything from Microsoft.

If someone applies for YC intending to use MS tech, do you count that as a point against?

We used to ask on the application what technology people planned to use, but we took that question out. So we wouldn't know in the application stage. At the interview stage it probably wouldn't come up, but if it did the answer would be far outweighed by what we thought of the people and what they'd built.

So it might influence us a bit, but we never know till we know other things that influence us a lot more.

Re: Ask HN: (No) Microsoft based start-ups?

#128
post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That doesn't discount the idea of fashion. YC attracts a certain crowd of applicants that tend to be younger and more closely tied into the emergent technology trends. If they have the time to take X months off of their jobs and their families, they also probably have time to learn new technologies that they didn't use in school or at work. I'm young enough but with a busy full time job and a toddler, learning new te…

> I know better than to expect to converse about our MS technology with the HN crowd, though. I'm not sure why. People talk about Clojure and Haskell and I'd bet good money that those are even less common for startups — heck, probably fewer people here can even read them. I don't personally like the Microsoft stack overall, but I do think some of the stuff they make is pretty compelling and it would be interesting to…

It's not the frequency - it's the dismissive attitude in some OSS or other non-MS circles that's very active in the online dev community.

Re: Ask HN: (No) Microsoft based start-ups?

#129
post #97
post #9

as it has already been mentioned -- having to pay license fees means ramen profitable is even further away for your average, small bootstrapped startup. there are some good startups based on the MS stack, but they're generally startups done by people with money, connections, or extensive experience in the MS stack.

With BizSpark or WebsiteSpark, you have three years. Then, a Windows Web Server 2008 R2 license only costs $469. If a business can't manage to scrape $469 together after three years, they probably have larger problems.

i agree that it isn't that expensive anymore. more than anything, its the existing reputation and simply the fact that there is a cost. there's a huge psychological gap between charging $0.01 and charging 0.

Re: Ask HN: (No) Microsoft based start-ups?

#130

The paid/free argument isn't really a valid basis for business decisions. Developing software is extremely expensive, even using free software. However, there are numerous overriding benefits of open source software. #1: Startup founders use technology they know. Open source developers tend to be willing to trade more risk and effort for a more tailored and flexible end product. This is a similar personality profile…

Good point with #4. The last time I was involved in a Microsoft project the SQL Server licensing costs were more than $30k per box. $30k was not a big deal on that project but it would have worked a lot better if the data had been spread across a bunch of little servers instead of two big ones. $30k * 2 is not so much; $30k * 50 starts to add up.

http://www.microsoft.com/sqlserver/2008/en/us/pricing.aspx

Post reply on HN