121–130 of 136 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's my go-to argument when choosing languages. Whenever someone says to use Java or .NET rather than the relatively obscure Ruby (or Node.js or whatever) because that makes it easier to find programmers, I always ask why they want to staff up on average to below average programmers. (Edit: sure there are good ones, just far more bad ones) At least if they use the obscure language, you know that the programmer in q…
why they want to staff up on average to below average programmers 1. Because they don't want to spend a lot of time looking for developers - it's far easier to find a Java developer than, say, a Ruby developer, simply because there's so many of them. Also, because there is so many of them, in all likelihood they will ask for standard wages whereas a developer with a good knowledge of some lesser known language/techno…
Given the huge productivity gulf between low and high ends of programmer productivity - a gulf that vastly outstrips the gulf between low and high pay levels - it stands to reason that as you move up the pay scale, programmers will tend to become net more productive in relation to what you pay them.
If you pay twice as much for a programmer who is ten times as productive, you end up ahead of the game.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Right, and why would you want to make it easier to hire bad people?
I've never been able to figure that out, and yet many companies continue to do it. Some mistaken belief that a filled seat is better than an empty seat or something.
A great example of community in action is the castle project at http://www.castleproject.org/
In the year 2010, .NET finally has a package management system. Guess who created it?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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?
.NET actually isn't that bad as far as performance and stability go. It's about on par with Java. It's much faster than scripting languages, and significantly more stable than Ruby. Administering a Windows stack can sometimes blow, but the languages and virtual machines themselves are relatively solid.
Downvote away, but it's silly to be listing performance and stability as an advantage to choosing MSFT, when at best it seems to be on par with its competitors.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
My beef with .NET is that the platform and community does not feel very organic like it is with others. Making a huge generalization, I would say that the .NET community waits around for the Mother ship to produce something that it can use. This was one impetus for the ALT.NET movement. A great example of community in action is the castle project at http://www.castleproject.org/ In the year 2010, .NET finally has a p…
The organic community is there, it's just not the dominant one but it has a significant presence.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
Actually, FogBugz is trivial to scale - there is never any more than a few dozen, to hundreds of users for any one project. And Copilot wasn't even envisaged or created by Joel, but was rather a project created by some interns. FogCreek doesn't innovate (they have a bug tracker and a remote support application based on VNC). Joel just happened to be one of the first to blog constantly about technology. He doesn't eve…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
At the other end of the spectrum of possibilities Joel's team at Fogcreek developed their own platform: http://www.joelonsoftware.com/items/2006/09/01b.html So I would say that he's actually got a pretty interesting perspective on choosing technology platforms for web applications.
Actually, that article is one of the most interesting and useful examples to point to when discussing the insanity that is Joel. That solution is just so ridiculous. His software runs on a compiler that has had 2 months work put into it and worse, it compiles to either VBScript or PHP. It's probably the most counter-intuitive solution ever implemented to solve the problem of needing a web-based application to run on…
My beef with .NET is that the platform and community does not feel very organic like it is with others. Making a huge generalization, I would say that the .NET community waits around for the Mother ship to produce something that it can use. This was one impetus for the ALT.NET movement. A great example of community in action is the castle project at http://www.castleproject.org/ In the year 2010, .NET finally has a p…
It was first created by non-MS guys, and there are others out there by community members. MS decided to form an officially-endorsed open source project for NuGet. Pretty good model actually. It's a collaboration of MS employees and community members and they take outside contributions. Not sure what's wrong with that. It needed to be in VS to take off. The organic community is there, it's just not the dominant one bu…
I agree, nothing wrong with that. I think a lot of the stuff that MS has been doing under Scott Guthrie in recent years has been very good in regards to fostering a better community.
>> It needed to be in VS to take off.
Do you think NuGet would be successful if MS had not officially endorsed the project?