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

131–136 of 136 posts

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

#131

Post by kondro »

johns wrote: post #129
kondro wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Except when it came time to move to .NET/Mono, they only had to update their compiler to generate IL instead of rewriting the whole app from scratch. Sounds smart to me.

Except they are still stuck with any badly implemented language "features" in their own language that they only spent 2 months on. Language design and implementation is hard, just ask the dozens/hundreds of full time developers that work on ruby, java, php or .net itself.

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

#132

Post by kondro »

arethuza wrote: post #117
kondro wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

SE/SO == "Stack Exchange/Stack Overflow"

Someone approached hiwith the idea for that product, it wasn't his.

Besides, this is a perfect example of him contradicting himself about how taking VC is a bad idea.

Besides, do you think they are profitable yet? How do you think they will get there without heading down the Expert's Exchange track? And let's not forget how much chaff is now being added every day to these sites, it now seems to be impossible to ask a difficult question because only relative newbies seem to be the only ones answering questions.

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

#133

Post by johns »

kondro wrote: post #131
johns wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except when it came time to move to .NET/Mono, they only had to update their compiler to generate IL instead of rewriting the whole app from scratch. Sounds smart to me.

Except they are still stuck with any badly implemented language "features" in their own language that they only spent 2 months on. Language design and implementation is hard, just ask the dozens/hundreds of full time developers that work on ruby, java, php or .net itself.

Do you have inside knowledge of their framework? Did you know wasabi has memoization and heap of other things frameworks like .NET don't even have? They spent a lot more than 2 months on Wasabi. I think your information is outdated.

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

#134

Post by johns »

JSig wrote: post #130
johns wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

>> It's a collaboration of MS employees and community members and they take outside contributions. Not sure what's wrong with that. 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 end…

Lots of things are successful without MS endorsement. If the integration had been as good as it was when it launched, yes. Only MS was willing to dedicate the resources to make that happen (VS addins, gallery site, etc).

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

#135

Post by lwat »

arethuza wrote: post #102
lwat wrote: post #39

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. 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 t…

The 'mixed results' you mention is no different from any other web platform on the planet.

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

#136

Post by danshapiro »

nostrademons wrote: post #81
danshapiro wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lots of things that you or I think are unique and special can be modeled as commodities. VCs model startups as commodities when they're preparing forecasts. Recruiters model high powered executives as commodities when they're preparing an interview pipeline. Like all abstractions, it's sometimes useful, and sometimes misleading. Certainly it's nothing worth getting excited about as a passing comment by the author.

I'm not quite sure that VCs model startups as commodities, considering that you get these huge pile-ons where everyone wants to invest in Twitter or Zynga but nobody wants to invest in the random startup your roommate founded. If startups actually behaved as commodities, brand names wouldn't matter so much. Ditto high-powered executives - if they were actually commodities, executive pay wouldn't skyrocket through the…

You're missing the point. There are times when it's useful to model things as commodities, and times when it's not. Here, you see Union Square Ventures modeling startups as commodities:

http://www.avc.com/a_vc/2008/08/venture-fund--1.html

but they would be the first to tell you that their investments are not treated as commodities when they're deciding on whether to provide follow-on investment.

Even traditional commodities - say, apples - are treated as commodities when they're being bought and sold in bushels. But when you go to pack your lunch, suddenly, you're inspecting for ripeness, bruises, etc.

Post reply on HN