I wondered if anyone out there knows of examples of startups that have developed web applications on a .NET framework? We have heard that Ruby on Rails is far quicker then trying to develop a web application on .NET but wondered if that is really true or if there are examples of companies that have just built on a .NET framework from the beginning? Thanks..
Ask HN: Ruby on Rails or .NET?
1–10 of 25 posts
Re: Ask HN: Ruby on Rails or .NET?
#2Probably depends most on what you and your team already know.
Re: Ask HN: Ruby on Rails or .NET?
#3Unless you are somehow already tied to Microsoft I don't see how it is at all sane to go with .NET for a greenfield project.
In .NET you are paying Microsoft for whatever they deem suitable to bequeath down to its licensees. There's been a lot of hand-wringing in the community over slow uptake on new web tech, and general problems that go unresolved because it's not an open source model. On the plus side, you get a nice IDE and documentation.
In Rails on the other hand, v3 just came out, allowing both sensible defaults, and unprecedented modularity. If Rails is too heavyweight you also have Sinatra. Everything is built on Rack which makes things much more standardized and interoperable amongst a range of web server options. You even have people doing work to integrate Ruby backends with bleeding edge tech like node.js that has huge world-changing advantages for certain types of applications over the monolithic and antiquated MS stack. In general the Ruby world is well integrated with the Unix and Open Source worlds where you are free and able to solve your own problems as well as take advantage of rapid progress by the community.
Given Microsoft's lack of success on the web over the years, and the amount of lock-in that Microsoft imposes on its developers, it just seems like a no brainer to go with open technologies (whether that be Rails, Django, or some PHP framework). The counterpoint is if your most talented developers are .NET guys, or you have a bunch of legacy MS stuff to integrate with.
Re: Ask HN: Ruby on Rails or .NET?
#4Why not fire off a quick prototype app on Rails or Sinatra and see how it feels? Ruby/Rails is $0, and committing your team's time to a decision made without any context is not.
There's no need to make that decision in a vacuum.
Re: Ask HN: Ruby on Rails or .NET?
#5Probably depends most on what you and your team already know.
This is so true.
We are a dev shop with a lot of experience with .NET. For our most recent web project we decided to take RoR for a spin. Things that would take an hour in .NET took us days. Not because RoR is lacking, but because we just don't have as deep a knowledge of Ruby or Rails.
Having used both, I can't think of a compelling technical reason to choose one over the other. I personally think .NET has a nicer tool chain, but RoR's tools are more than adequate.
Go with what your developers want to use.
Re: Ask HN: Ruby on Rails or .NET?
#6Of .NET startups, plentyoffish and stackoverflow come to mind, and both appear to scale nicely. NET is not really my cup of tea, but if it's what you are proficient in then go for it.
Re: Ask HN: Ruby on Rails or .NET?
#7Unless you are somehow already tied to Microsoft I don't see how it is at all sane to go with .NET for a greenfield project. In .NET you are paying Microsoft for whatever they deem suitable to bequeath down to its licensees. There's been a lot of hand-wringing in the community over slow uptake on new web tech, and general problems that go unresolved because it's not an open source model. On the plus side, you get a n…
"Lack of success on the web"? Besides the obvious "Stack Overflow, Myspace, Plenty of Fish" answer, observe that many --- perhaps over 50% --- of the largest company sites on the web are .NET, as are retail banking sites, trading firms, brokerages, etc. And, obviously, something like half of all enterprise web apps are .NET.
If that all seems like it trends corporate for you, well, that's obviously going to happen when your platform costs money.
All else being equal, would I start a new project on Microsoft's stack? No. But if I was really strong on ASP.NET and completely new to Django or Rails, I'd stick with ASP.NET. It works, it works at scale, and it's far from the hardest stack to code for. I might even suggest it's better than PHP, all else being equal.
Re: Ask HN: Ruby on Rails or .NET?
#8Probably depends most on what you and your team already know.
This is so true. We are a dev shop with a lot of experience with .NET. For our most recent web project we decided to take RoR for a spin. Things that would take an hour in .NET took us days. Not because RoR is lacking, but because we just don't have as deep a knowledge of Ruby or Rails. Having used both, I can't think of a compelling technical reason to choose one over the other. I personally think .NET has a nicer t…
If you do go with .NET and you are intending on forming a real company, then depending on which country you are in you can get pretty much all of the Microsoft development software for (I think) $100 - payable at the end of 3 years. I don't think this is open to every country, but a pretty cool programme to enrol in if you can. Microsoft Bizspark I think it is called. There are a few other variations as well, for different types of startups.
Re: Ask HN: Ruby on Rails or .NET?
#9Here's our story from starting out with .NET and then moving to Rails:
http://www.infoq.com/articles/architecting-tekpub
There are technical reasons and financial reasons for choosing either one. Have a read - hope it helps.
Re: Ask HN: Ruby on Rails or .NET?
#10Isn't Huddle on .NET? It's a pretty successful project management company.