51–60 of 130 posts
If you are not against Java you might want to check out JSF. Code your pages using Facelets though, its better than using JSP. JSF is nice because (unlike ASP.net) it cleanly separates behavior and presentation (its purely MVC). And its a component based architecture which is rendering format agnostic (HTML, WML, XHTML-MP, cHTML). So you can code one page which can render the contents in a different format depending…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Me neither. I must have booted up Big Endian again. I hate it when I do that. Take two programmers who are novices. Throw them into any two languages. If we use an automated DAL and a mentor-apprentice training paradigm in both languages, I can have the ASP.NET guy up and running and more productive faster than the other guy. for writing average run-of-the-mill web apps
I'm not sure that getting ASP.NET guy up and running and more productive faster is a laudable goal. Say productivity of ASP.NET guy is f(t) where t is time and productivity of guy is g(t). I would submit that there exists some T where g(t) > f(t) for all t > T (t starts at 0, for simplicity.) That is my stupid way of saying, who gives a crap how long stupid ASP.NET guy takes to get productive? In the long run, inevit…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Me neither. I must have booted up Big Endian again. I hate it when I do that. Take two programmers who are novices. Throw them into any two languages. If we use an automated DAL and a mentor-apprentice training paradigm in both languages, I can have the ASP.NET guy up and running and more productive faster than the other guy. for writing average run-of-the-mill web apps
I'm not sure that getting ASP.NET guy up and running and more productive faster is a laudable goal. Say productivity of ASP.NET guy is f(t) where t is time and productivity of guy is g(t). I would submit that there exists some T where g(t) > f(t) for all t > T (t starts at 0, for simplicity.) That is my stupid way of saying, who gives a crap how long stupid ASP.NET guy takes to get productive? In the long run, inevit…
I liked it better with the forumlas. (grin) Seriously -- that's a good point. But I don't think it is language-dependent. Might be. I don't know. From what I've seen languages and platforms are just new and interesting ways for programmers to shoot themselves in the foot. Good programming remains the same now as it was decades ago. That is, unless somebody has started using the force and I don't know about it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You mean that subset of straightforward business development that Microsoft thinks ASP.NET is for. If you want to put subtotals in a grid of financial numbers, for example, you either have to jump through hoops or move it off to Microsoft Reporting Services or Crystal Reports. There's a wide gap between where ASP.NET's usefulness ends and where the really fancy stuff begins. And yes, you totally can beat the librarie…
Can you point me to someone that has beaten the libraries of the "Dark Side"? I'd like to check them out.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'll jump into the flames -- what the heck. The problem isn't ASP.NET: it's probably the way you were taught how to use it. The Microsoft tools do so much crap that it's like being put into a room full of levers and knobs with cryptic labels on them. Hard to know where to start or how to make things work. Sit down with somebody who is using one of the automated DALs (like NetTiers, NHibernate, CSLA, etc) and knows wh…
You mean that subset of straightforward business development that Microsoft thinks ASP.NET is for. If you want to put subtotals in a grid of financial numbers, for example, you either have to jump through hoops or move it off to Microsoft Reporting Services or Crystal Reports. There's a wide gap between where ASP.NET's usefulness ends and where the really fancy stuff begins. And yes, you totally can beat the librarie…
It all boils down to what you are doing. Lots of shops can have 3 or 4 coders doing the mainline stuff and 1 guy who can do the tricky stuff. It's an effective use of lower-skilled programming resources.
I'd have to disagree with you on the libraries. While I'm sure there are some good libraries out there, when I'm plugged into VS I've got some kazillion or so things I can do without having to Google, link, recompile, or do squat. And I can easily make libraries to share with others. It depends on your needs. Since MS does a little bit of everything for everybody, the libraries are probably the broadest that are easily available.
If you are not against Java you might want to check out JSF. Code your pages using Facelets though, its better than using JSP. JSF is nice because (unlike ASP.net) it cleanly separates behavior and presentation (its purely MVC). And its a component based architecture which is rendering format agnostic (HTML, WML, XHTML-MP, cHTML). So you can code one page which can render the contents in a different format depending…
Thank you sir for justifying me staying away from all these frameworks.
So my point is: JSF is very powerful if you can master it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It shows a lack of nothing. What DAL is a code generator that writes large quantities of code based on your 'models'? It simply provides a better or easier interface. Here is what I meant: When a commercial application becomes popular to generate large amounts of code to do a small amount of work, like some CRUD, I personally feel that shows a flaw in the fundamental way the language works. The language should either…
I'm hoping I'm not getting into a flame war -- not my intent. Here's the problem with what you said -- the word "code". It's not defined. In any kind of large environment, my application uses all kinds of compiled code. So what if I push a button or flick a switch to use another hunk of code that I don't have to write or test? Is using System.Io somehow "better" than say, having an automated macro that generates IO b…
Obviously, I am biased by what I have seen in practice. I also dislike a lot of 'magic', or things I don't understand and have control over being tightly integrated with my code.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm hoping I'm not getting into a flame war -- not my intent. Here's the problem with what you said -- the word "code". It's not defined. In any kind of large environment, my application uses all kinds of compiled code. So what if I push a button or flick a switch to use another hunk of code that I don't have to write or test? Is using System.Io somehow "better" than say, having an automated macro that generates IO b…
No cause for concern - I understand that a lot of what we are disagreeing on here are small points. This is the proper venue for discussion, and I appreciate your points. I do agree that having some sort of code generation does have a place, and can be useful. But it is also has it's problems, especially related to maintainability. Lastly, the last time I looked at some code generation, there was so much custom junk…
What I think I see happening over the past few years is a lot of authors and researchers developing code generation templates as part of their work. So instead of the guy who's got the book telling you to make 7-tier, multi-phasic, distributed apps, you got the guy, a website, a following, and a set of templates and wizards that make this thing for you.
I'm not crazy about that at all, but I think it is having the effect of evolving the code generation community. I'm seeing a lot more people who want to "program the programming" Most, of course, create monsters. But it only takes one good set of easily-used and rock-solid templates to create real value for everybody. So in the old days, there was 5-10 CASE tools and they all sucked, now there's more like 500 template authors, and 10-15 are pretty good. In my opinion, that's a good trend, but the genre of "code generation" still has a well-deserved negative connotation.
There are plenty of startups using ASP.NET or Java-based tech. In fact most companies started by "business types" are .NET/Java because they are easier to find disposable coders for. You don't see as many .NET shops here because most posters are (a) young, (b) non-business types, and they had a chance to pick a technology. Most went with something dynamic and Linux-based. We did too. We're on RoR, despite having tons…
The startup where I work was started by business types but we're using Python. Although I have to admit that at times it is hard to find experienced Python developers (so we gave up on the Python part and started looking for experienced developers period. Turns out Python is pretty easy to learn). My biggest problem with ASP.NET (and the reason I would pick Java over it if I had to use one of the two) is that it only…
However, as a struggling one-two person startup, you probably will not want to pay crazy prices for dedicated windows hosting (Win2003 server+MSSQL). And shared Windows hosting is always crap: overloaded servers, terrible performance, etc.
Basically, Windows platform is not very startup-friendly: you develop slower (thus will take you longer, i.e. you'll bleed more money) and later it will cost you more to host your app. Besides, a proper set of Visual Studio + MSDN subscription is not exactly cheap.
For well-funded startups .NET makes more economic sense: easier to hire for and performs/scales well (myspace).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The startup where I work was started by business types but we're using Python. Although I have to admit that at times it is hard to find experienced Python developers (so we gave up on the Python part and started looking for experienced developers period. Turns out Python is pretty easy to learn). My biggest problem with ASP.NET (and the reason I would pick Java over it if I had to use one of the two) is that it only…
Depends on how you look at it. Windows Server 2003 is not a bad server OS and properly written and deployed ASP.NET application will be able to handle TONS of requests. Two reasons: native code execution (.NET caches compiled code in memory) and very efficient threading. This thought may be unpopular but it does not make it less true. However, as a struggling one-two person startup, you probably will not want to pay…
SQL Server 2005 Developer Edition cost $50 bucks (SQL Dev Ed is basically Enterprise Ed with license restriction).
I hope in the future MS will lower the prices for most of their stuffs.