21–30 of 78 posts
Not that it matters that much but I notice there's no .NET or C# on the "Technology Used" list. Is there really not a single YC company that uses the .NET stack? I'm not surprised that there's a strong bias toward open source technologies among these companies, but given how widely .NET used elsewhere in the enterprise world I find it pretty remarkable NONE of those companies decided to go with a MS stack.
Not that it matters that much but I notice there's no .NET or C# on the "Technology Used" list. Is there really not a single YC company that uses the .NET stack? I'm not surprised that there's a strong bias toward open source technologies among these companies, but given how widely .NET used elsewhere in the enterprise world I find it pretty remarkable NONE of those companies decided to go with a MS stack.
Licensing fees and tech made for large slow enterprise teams. I've seen the shops that have C# or Java as their backend and they move too slow to be a competitive threat. If their frontend is written in Ruby/Rails or Python/Django then maybe they have a chance against the competition but usually they'll be held back by the slow progress made on the backend. For some reason the big slow enterprise mindset gets transmi…
Choice of language only affects your culture if you believe choice of language affects your culture and let it happen.
Not that it matters that much but I notice there's no .NET or C# on the "Technology Used" list. Is there really not a single YC company that uses the .NET stack? I'm not surprised that there's a strong bias toward open source technologies among these companies, but given how widely .NET used elsewhere in the enterprise world I find it pretty remarkable NONE of those companies decided to go with a MS stack.
Licensing fees and tech made for large slow enterprise teams. I've seen the shops that have C# or Java as their backend and they move too slow to be a competitive threat. If their frontend is written in Ruby/Rails or Python/Django then maybe they have a chance against the competition but usually they'll be held back by the slow progress made on the backend. For some reason the big slow enterprise mindset gets transmi…
This is complete nonsense. It is popular nonsense, but nonsense nonetheless. .NET is a perfectly reasonable tech stack for certain kinds of problems -- for example if your application has to interact regularly with MSFT core APIs, you'd have to have a pretty compelling reason NOT to use the MSFT-native stack.
> It all relates to the enterprise vs hacker mentality
This too is a story that HN likes to tell itself to justify its preference for this week's hot new javascript framework (or whatever).
At the end of the day, different tools are good for different use cases -- and while yes, .NET tends to work better when you're coding to "enterprisey" use cases, that doesn't mean that your product team itself has to operate in a "large slow enterprise" way
(Plug: If you're a top notch .NET developer and you want to work with others who are as well, at a place that doesn't treat C# and .NET as second class citizens, hey, drop me a line.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Licensing fees and tech made for large slow enterprise teams. I've seen the shops that have C# or Java as their backend and they move too slow to be a competitive threat. If their frontend is written in Ruby/Rails or Python/Django then maybe they have a chance against the competition but usually they'll be held back by the slow progress made on the backend. For some reason the big slow enterprise mindset gets transmi…
> tech made for large slow enterprise teams. This is complete nonsense. It is popular nonsense, but nonsense nonetheless. .NET is a perfectly reasonable tech stack for certain kinds of problems -- for example if your application has to interact regularly with MSFT core APIs, you'd have to have a pretty compelling reason NOT to use the MSFT-native stack. > It all relates to the enterprise vs hacker mentality This too…
I guess I should have said that in my comment; that they're indicators. I didn't mean to imply that there aren't some good uses for C# and Java. You mention one and the other reply mentions another.
Not that it matters that much but I notice there's no .NET or C# on the "Technology Used" list. Is there really not a single YC company that uses the .NET stack? I'm not surprised that there's a strong bias toward open source technologies among these companies, but given how widely .NET used elsewhere in the enterprise world I find it pretty remarkable NONE of those companies decided to go with a MS stack.
Remember - all TripleByte is doing is reinforcing the bad hiring practices that companies already have.
Not that it matters that much but I notice there's no .NET or C# on the "Technology Used" list. Is there really not a single YC company that uses the .NET stack? I'm not surprised that there's a strong bias toward open source technologies among these companies, but given how widely .NET used elsewhere in the enterprise world I find it pretty remarkable NONE of those companies decided to go with a MS stack.
I wrote C# for 8 years, but switched to Ruby after following an my boss to a new startup that is using Ruby. I advocated for years about how great .net is (and the tools still are the best), but if i'm being honest here. Ruby really is a lot quicker for prototyping. It's the perfect fit for startups.
Not that it matters that much but I notice there's no .NET or C# on the "Technology Used" list. Is there really not a single YC company that uses the .NET stack? I'm not surprised that there's a strong bias toward open source technologies among these companies, but given how widely .NET used elsewhere in the enterprise world I find it pretty remarkable NONE of those companies decided to go with a MS stack.
Now I'm using it again, for the same reasons. I already know it, I'm pretty quick with it, it's predictable, and it works. I'm also old school and will probably deploy physical servers when the time comes. Look at StackOverflow - their whole site runs on a handful of properly configured servers running properly written code.
That said, .NET is not sexy. The tooling is expensive (Pro, Ultimate) or crippled (Express). It runs on Windows, which has fallen out of favor[2].
Even though I like .NET, I'd advise anyone new to learn JavaScript first. In my opinion, Node.js is my nightmare realized, but it works, and it's now possible to make things work in the browser and on the server with knowledge of only one language. More bang for your buck.
For startups technology choices are incidental when they're not the core of the business. If you're making a database, your tech choices matter. A consumer app? You're more likely to die of a bad product or team drama[3] than fallout from rendering HTML with bash scripts via CGI.
So anyway, you don't see more .NET because it's expensive, it's not the best beginner language, and it doesn't run on OS X. Also, the alternatives are much improved - It's hard to argue for .NET over something else because even where it's better, it's not that much better. And most of the time it doesn't matter.
[1] Grew up with access to an MSDN subscription. I knew of and played with Linux, but in the pre-virtualization days, I had to reboot to use it. Understandably, I preferred tools I could use on Windows, my primary OS. Also, while it's no longer the case, the MSDN documentation used to be fantastic. I basically taught myself how to program by reading the MSDN docs and tearing apart the sample code and programs.
[2] For the same reasons I developed on Windows as a kid, younger developers will want something they can run on OS X directly, or for free in a VM.
[3] Like this: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9840419 The number of startups that die due to founder drama is astonishing.
Not that it matters that much but I notice there's no .NET or C# on the "Technology Used" list. Is there really not a single YC company that uses the .NET stack? I'm not surprised that there's a strong bias toward open source technologies among these companies, but given how widely .NET used elsewhere in the enterprise world I find it pretty remarkable NONE of those companies decided to go with a MS stack.
Back in 2005 when I started Loopt I went all in with Windows Server, .NET, and SQL Server. I already knew the tooling[1]. No regrets. It never held us back - product issues did. Now I'm using it again, for the same reasons. I already know it, I'm pretty quick with it, it's predictable, and it works. I'm also old school and will probably deploy physical servers when the time comes. Look at StackOverflow - their whole…
Visual Studio Community 2013 (and 2015) are completely free and nearly fully featured. Gone are the days of Express being a super lightweight VS IDE. I used to buy Pro for side work but now I can get by with Community.