Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: Ruby on Rails or .NET?

news.ycombinator.com

11–20 of 25 posts

Re: Ask HN: Ruby on Rails or .NET?

#11
I think there are many things that you need to consider when deciding on a technology. One is preexisting skill, if you are already a .Net C# person then go with what you know. That being said rails is free and can be deployed on *nix which is also free.

Dont get caught up too much in worrying what other people are using. You initial technology stack will not make or break your company as you can always iterate to another technology stack at a later date if you wish.

Re: Ask HN: Ruby on Rails or .NET?

#12

I think there are many things that you need to consider when deciding on a technology. One is preexisting skill, if you are already a .Net C# person then go with what you know. That being said rails is free and can be deployed on *nix which is also free. Dont get caught up too much in worrying what other people are using. You initial technology stack will not make or break your company as you can always iterate to an…

agree.. you need to build a product in whatever you are most productive in , and get it done the fastest.

Re: Ask HN: Ruby on Rails or .NET?

#13
post #7
post #3

Unless 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 wh…

IMO it just depends on the servers you're going to be using and who you'll be working with. I would stay away, far away from traditional ASP.NET. MVC is far better, but I would only really use it over Rails if I was working on a primarily MS stack environment.

Re: Ask HN: Ruby on Rails or .NET?

#14

Why 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.

This -- and if you can successfully build a prototype you should have most everything you need to build The Real Thing(TM)

Re: Ask HN: Ruby on Rails or .NET?

#15
>I wondered if anyone out there knows of examples of startups that have developed web applications on a .NET framework?

Why yes, actually -- the startup I am working on uses .NET as I (the technical co-founder) am traditionally a .NET developer. http://salesathand.com

> We have heard that Ruby on Rails is far quicker then trying to develop a web application

This is true if you are familiar with RoR. If you're not familiar with the platform then it's not going to be true.

>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?

Yes, I am quite productive on .NET and that's why I stay. I'd love to migrate to an OSS platform -- Python would be amazing -- but I'm just not productive in that environment (yet) and the one thing a startup can't loose is productivity!

I use tons of OSS tools, though, that make things go faster and smoother. The biggest of which is NHibernate. Also, avoid ASP.NET and use MVC if you can.

Re: Ask HN: Ruby on Rails or .NET?

#16
post #7
post #3

Unless 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 wh…

I'm talking about Microsoft's web ventures, not people building on an MS Stack.

Re: Ask HN: Ruby on Rails or .NET?

#17
Barring very specific cases, the language you select isn't going to determine your success in a strict sense. You and your team need to be well versed in whatever it is you end up selecting.

That all said, if you don't know .NET or Rails or Ruby or whatever - you're probably better off selecting something that won't cost you money right from the start...

There are programs that MS has to temporarily offset these costs, as others mentioned. Check out www.microsoft.com/bizspark/

(You/others may also be interested in http://www.microsoft.com/web/websitespark/ and https://www.dreamspark.com/default.aspx)

Re: Ask HN: Ruby on Rails or .NET?

#18
I went through the same thought process just a little while ago with my new startup. I'm proficient in .Net but I kept an open mind and explored other web technologies. I thought I was somehow missing the boat by not using RoR or something open. But I had discovered what others have and that is that .Net scales just fine. I have government agency as a customer and they use .net and they have some very heavily utilized sites and the hardware spec to run them is quite manageable. Also there are legions of talented .net developers the world over. In terms of the development cost, the express versions of the tools are free and they are not missing features that you would need unless you have a big team. The server costs can be mitigated by joining the bizspark program. The other reason I chose to use the .Net platform is that there are 3rd party components that I require. I would rather use these natively rather than wrapping them in a web service or something like that. Personally I think the price between “free” and using .Net is in the noise floor.

Re: Ask HN: Ruby on Rails or .NET?

#19
Some startups that used the .NET stack:

-Stackoverflow: http://stackoverflow.com/

-Agile Zen: http://agilezen.com/

The framework you use to develop doesn't matter. If you like .NET go with it, if you like RoR go with it. For costs, you can take a look at the BizSpark program from MS, you can get all MS products you need for $100 for 3 years, then you pay for it.

Re: Ask HN: Ruby on Rails or .NET?

#20
In my experience consumer start ups use ror. Business startups use .net. U will get gouged if u blow up and ur using ms stack. Especially SQL server. Look at prices for enterprise edition, which is required for horizontal partitioning.
Post reply on HN