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

Nobody really gives a damn what you built your site in (why I chose asp.net).

tumblr.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 136 posts

Re: Nobody really gives a damn what you built your site in (why I chose asp.net).

#101

Post by firemanx »

japherwocky wrote: post #79
jswinghammer wrote: post #36

I think ASP.Net is a pretty smart move even if you do have a strong CS background and know a few other platforms. The basic reason is that Microsoft stuff performs really well and you won't have to worry about a lot of problems for a very long time. Chances are one or two webservers will handle your page requests for quite some time before you need to start thinking about it. ASP.Net's sessions also work very well wi…

By what metric does Microsoft stuff perform really well? You're seriously saying you choose Microsoft for performance and stability? And you have a dozen upvotes?

Do you have any proof otherwise? I've developed software on numerous platforms, and the Microsoft stack was incredibly stable, and performed better than any Ruby/PHP/Python stack I've worked with.

I prefer to do most things in Rails these days, but I'm not kidding myself that for raw performance, .NET is great.

Re: Nobody really gives a damn what you built your site in (why I chose asp.net).

#102

Post by arethuza »

lwat wrote: post #39
noonespecial wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My beef with ASP.NET is that it makes it disturbingly easy to write code that doesn't scale well and then is ridiculously hard to scale after the fact. It really is all about the initial design not the language. ASP.NET just makes it too easy to go with bad design and library choices, not to mention the tons of examples of bad design that newbies might accidentally follow at the beginning.

My beef with ASP.NET is that it makes it disturbingly easy to write code that doesn't scale well and then is ridiculously hard to scale after the fact. Explain? Example? I don't see how this could possibly be true for .net but not for Rails or Python or PHP or whatever.

I think what noonespecial is probably getting at is that because .Net is usually written in Visual Studio a lot of people stick applications together in a RAD approach without giving much consideration for what is happening under the hood. Not all, of course, but probably a larger proportion that for platforms that don't have tools with RAD features like Visual Studio.

WebForms in ASP.Net are pretty much an attempt to take the developer experience of Visual Basic and make it work on the web - arguably with mixed results.

I really don't think there is anything wrong with .Net as a platform - but things like WebForms can be rather disturbing if not used with care.

Re: Nobody really gives a damn what you built your site in (why I chose asp.net).

#104

Post by ThomPete »

mkramlich wrote: post #62

Your endusers may not care. Not directly. But they'll care when your site has problems or is slow. This part, in turn, is heavily influenced by the quality of engineers you have behind the scenes, and the choices they make. The nature/quality of your engineers will be influenced by what kinds of technical choices are in place at the time you start trying to hire them on. As a general rule, for example, a LAMP stack i…

Pardon my ignorance. But isn't your site slow if you develop it wrong, not because you use the "wrong" language?

I thought there where good developers in all programming languages and really bad ones too?

For how many people is overnight success really the case? Most companies grow slowly over the years making scaling issues much less volatile.

Re: Nobody really gives a damn what you built your site in (why I chose asp.net).

#105

Post by math »

jswinghammer wrote: post #36

I think ASP.Net is a pretty smart move even if you do have a strong CS background and know a few other platforms. The basic reason is that Microsoft stuff performs really well and you won't have to worry about a lot of problems for a very long time. Chances are one or two webservers will handle your page requests for quite some time before you need to start thinking about it. ASP.Net's sessions also work very well wi…

I second that. I know quite a number of very high calibre C# developers and in my experience getting good C# developers to work on interesting projects has not been overly difficult.

I'm currently building a site in C# and deploying using mono on Linux. Very impressed with mono so far. My site has not been tested under high load, but nothing is suggesting to me so far that mono is not a viable option, and a solution which solves many of the problems pointed out in the article's comments.

Re: Nobody really gives a damn what you built your site in (why I chose asp.net).

#106

Post by wccrawford »

tjogin wrote: post #91
knieveltech wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're going to find the full range of talent regardless of which language you're using. Erlang doesn't guarantee godlike competence, and .NET doesn't guarantee mediocrity. I think your biases are showing a little here.

I never said anything about a guarantee. I'm just saying that if you want to hire a programmer, the fact that there are thousands and thousands more of .NET programmers doesn't make hiring any easier . You want quality, not quantity.

Actually, it does make hiring easier. It doesn't making hiring -good people- easier.

Re: Nobody really gives a damn what you built your site in (why I chose asp.net).

#107

Post by MortenK »

kondro wrote: post #14
tejaswiy wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is what I don't get. ASP.NET scales pretty well as Joel opines. Why do people think .NET is bad just because it feels enterprise-y? More: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NWHfY_lvKIQ

You're right, .NET (even though I despise it) scales as well as anything else. Scalability is much more about design decisions than language/platform choice. However, Joel Spolsky is a tool. Everyone I know and respect thinks he's a tool. He is a prime example of being successful because of being lucky, rather than being good. Do not quote Joel, he can't form a valid argument for a topic without circling back on hims…

Whether Joel Spolsky is or is not a tool, lucky, good etc is completely irrelevant. He and the rest of the SE/SO team has built a highly scalable solution based on .NET. So in a discussion about scaling on .NET, it absolutely makes sense to listen to his experiences.

Re: Nobody really gives a damn what you built your site in (why I chose asp.net).

#108

Post by superlogical »

dennisgorelik wrote: post #59

While Scott Guthrie is in charge of ASP.NET team -- ASP.NET would be a good choice (even though Microsoft overall is stagnating).

While Microsoft seems to be stagnating at the same time Mono and Linux is gaining huge popularity. Checkout these links

http://tirania.org/blog/archive/2011/Feb-14.html

IOS - IPod, IPad, IPhone: MonoTouch http://monotouch.net - Windows: Mono http://mono-project.com/Main_Page - Mac: MonoMac http://www.mono-project.com/MonoMac - Android: MonoDroid http://monodroid.net/ - Blackberry: MonoWebOs to be announced

Re: Nobody really gives a damn what you built your site in (why I chose asp.net).

#109

Post by MortenK »

DjDarkman wrote: post #57

I feel that the author just didn't try any other technologies. > I found ASP.NET to be unmatched in terms of documentation I find this hard to believe. Again I think the author knows his way around Microsoft products, and is biased towards it. > Hiring quality coders on a bootstrapper’s budget is easier for ASP.NET than it is for anything open source. It just is. I find this statement self-justifying and false. If a…

As others have mentioned, using the term "unmatched" might be a stretch. I really wouldn't know the state of documentation for something like, lets say Lisp or Clojure, and probably the author doesn't either. But it's not up for discussion that .NET has a very comprehensive, high quality level of documentation, just take a look at MSDN.

Re: Nobody really gives a damn what you built your site in (why I chose asp.net).

#110

Post by tjogin »

wccrawford wrote: post #106
tjogin wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I never said anything about a guarantee. I'm just saying that if you want to hire a programmer, the fact that there are thousands and thousands more of .NET programmers doesn't make hiring any easier . You want quality, not quantity.

Actually, it does make hiring easier. It doesn't making hiring -good people- easier.

Right, and why would you want to make it easier to hire bad people?
Post reply on HN