Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Leaving .net

whatupdave.tumblr.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 221 posts

Re: Leaving .net

#81

Post by lelele »

jiaaro wrote: post #64
cageface wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What makes you say Python is more appropriate for greysuits? Ruby and Python seem very much alike to me.

Google makes him say it ;)

Yeah, Google, for the most part. You are not using an agile language, you are using some of the technology Google relies on, aren't you? ;-)

Google, and beyond it. You could easily have a case for Python: Nokia has made it available for Symbian, Microsoft endorses it via ActiveState, and so on.

My friends, if we want to be effective entrepreneurs, we must learn how to repackage things in a way customers will find attractive. A language can be just a technology, a framework, an application, and so on... whatever concerns your customers. There is no point in being strict about terminology, unless you are selling to savvy techies.

Re: Leaving .net

#82

Post by latch »

jimbobimbo wrote: post #46
st3fan wrote: post #30

What do people here think of .Net as a choice of platform for startups?

I think it's great. Get BizSpark or WebsiteSpark to cover your licensing costs during development; start with el-cheapo $20/mo hosting which gives you reasonable bandwidth and MS SQL option - and you are all set. If three years down the road (that's how long *Spark lasts) you will find yourself thinking about licensing costs - you aren't doing it right: in three years of startup it's either you're getting enough prof…

I hear this often, but I don't buy it. The implications [seems] to be that most startups either succeed or fail within 3 years.

Does anyone have proof of this?

My personal observation is that most companies will still be around and they'll neither be millionaires nor broke. In such a situation, the bizspark bait-n-switch can be significant.

Picking technology today on the basis that you'll either crash and burn or be hugely successful in 3 years seems like the sales pitch of a man who lends you free software for 3 years.

Re: Leaving .net

#83

Post by lelele »

jacquesm wrote: post #69
gaius wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a matter of semantics. "A Java application" is perfectly honest. Just like when someone says "a native application" it says nothing about if it was actually written in OCaml.

Until the time that HR hires a person to collaborate on your project with 'java' experience and it turns out you wrote your code in clojure. Stuff like that tends to have consequences, especially when there are contracts and liabilities involved.

Doesn't HR list frameworks along with languages? Is JDK knowledge alone enough to be employed anywhere?

Re: Leaving .net

#84

Post by mahmud »

palish wrote: post #65
mahmud wrote: post #2

There were already open source MVC web frameworks and an army of .net developers who could have collaborated to make them great but nothing much happened. He is lamenting that the .NET community didn't embrace the pioneering MVC frameworks from the OS community, but waited for Microsoft to deliver its own "blessed" framework. Here is what he is forgetting: Economics. A good chunk of .NET developers are not using the…

Speaking of SBCL, I really wish someone would make SBCL stable on Windows. Please. (Windows XP, Vista, and 7. Don't even worry about 64-bit right now, just get 32-bit fully functional and stable.)

OT, but here:

http://clgtk2.wordpress.com/2010/09/16/related-project-sbcl-...

Re: Leaving .net

#85

Post by pohl »

acabal wrote: post #8

A sizeable chunk of .NET development happens in the corporate/enterprise world. That sort of environment isn't interested in collaboration, open source, etc.--they're interested in the guaranteed support the MS stack provides, and the idiot-proof web basics provided by ASP/webforms/MVC. If shit hits the fan in the .NET stack for a big enough corporate project, someone in the office can phone/email MS and get support…

If shit hits the fan in the .NET stack for a big enough corporate project, someone in the office can phone/email MS and get support for their problem.

That's the canard, but it has seldom worked out that way for me. Whenever I've encountered a problem that can be traced to a flaw in their products, the suggestion of calling for support is usually met with riotous laughter. (In other words, everybody says it's a selling-point of their stack, but nobody believes it.) Maybe none of our corporate projects have been "big enough". How big, exactly, does one have to be?

Edit: come to think of it, most of the problems I have seen have been things that would go against their lock-in strategies, and maybe that's where the laughter comes from. The solution is always something like waiting for hackers to reverse engineer something like NTLM, or Samba, or WINS, or exchange integration...

Re: Leaving .net

#86

Post by india »

jacquesm wrote: post #5
mahmud wrote: post #2

There were already open source MVC web frameworks and an army of .net developers who could have collaborated to make them great but nothing much happened. He is lamenting that the .NET community didn't embrace the pioneering MVC frameworks from the OS community, but waited for Microsoft to deliver its own "blessed" framework. Here is what he is forgetting: Economics. A good chunk of .NET developers are not using the…

Not only that, if you are a startup that wants to do b2b and you want to sell a product in to that market that will have a tight connection to stuff your clients already run you will be required to use .NET by your customers. Unless you like uphill battles that's the way you'll go eventually. It sucks, but it is the reality of the business environment, web side stuff that is abstracted through some HTTP interface you…

This is completely true and exactly the place I am stuck at. I have a product with major parts in RoR, that the business end user loves but the IT just won't let through. I have to now learn asp.net mvc and port everything over to it. I dread going through that.

Re: Leaving .net

#87

Post by nopal »

MikeMacMan wrote: post #21

My buddy and I are starting a web project (a Q&A site for translations) and have chosen ASP.NET MVC. It doesn't abstract away the innards of the web like WebForms did. It has no more magic than RoR. Why are we using .NET instead of something like RoR or (my framework of choice) Grails? Because my buddy knows it inside and out, the tools are great, and we'd like to minimize the number of unknowns in our project. We're…

Are you participating in BizSpark to get the tools?

Re: Leaving .net

#88

Post by smiler »

d4nt wrote: post #51
mahmud wrote: post #2

There were already open source MVC web frameworks and an army of .net developers who could have collaborated to make them great but nothing much happened. He is lamenting that the .NET community didn't embrace the pioneering MVC frameworks from the OS community, but waited for Microsoft to deliver its own "blessed" framework. Here is what he is forgetting: Economics. A good chunk of .NET developers are not using the…

I agree, but would add this. Microsoft's (development) tools have never had any underlying principles other than: enabling people with minimal knowledge to get stuff done. Thinking back through MFC, COM, VB v1-6, Access, SharePoint, WebForms and ADO.NET, none of them were characterised by any particular architectural purity or design aesthetic. But they enabled a generation of corporate developers to hack stuff toget…

This. Right now, as a .NET developer myself, it is impossible to keep up with all the new frameworks that Microsoft are releasing.

Re: Leaving .net

#89

Post by gaius »

jacquesm wrote: post #69
gaius wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a matter of semantics. "A Java application" is perfectly honest. Just like when someone says "a native application" it says nothing about if it was actually written in OCaml.

Until the time that HR hires a person to collaborate on your project with 'java' experience and it turns out you wrote your code in clojure. Stuff like that tends to have consequences, especially when there are contracts and liabilities involved.

We used to say that Tcl/Tk was a C library with a very complex configuration file ;-)

Re: Leaving .net

#90

Post by arethuza »

jtdowney wrote: post #70
dangrossman wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are colleges teaching .NET? I'd never heard of that.

It isn't the first thing they teach you at Purdue but a sizable chunk of CS and CIT students learn C#/.NET

I remember meeting someone who said "oh yes, we did assembler in our course" - upon being questioned they had been doing .Net CLR instructions.

So much for the 6502 assembler I grew up with :-|

Post reply on HN