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

Why you can't be a good .NET developer

codeofrob.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 22 posts

Re: Why you can't be a good .NET developer

#11

Post by tracker1 »

lujim wrote: post #8
tracker1 wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure I entirely agree with that. A lot of times, people get stuck on a certain tooling, or patterns even when they don't apply. In particular with .Net, is the Data Application Blocks of Enterprise Library, and the rest of entlib in general. Most of which only makes software more complicated than usually necessary, and makes me shudder to this day when I hear the term "Enterprise" applied to software. It isn'…

I think that it's also common for teams to get painted into a corner trying to use the next great, bleeding edge, thing. I too shudder at the term "Enterprise", but I also shudder when I see a company desperately trying to hire a "NoSQL Expert" at any cost because they built everything around Mongo when a relational database would have been fine.

True enough, though I actually like mongo's document centric database for a lot of use cases. Though with MS-SQL 2016, Postgres + plv8 and binary-json, and rethinkdb, there are better options these days.

Re: Why you can't be a good .NET developer

#12

Post by aphextron »

tracker1 wrote: post #5

I'm currently working in a team on a MEAN-stack project... it's less than 6 months old, and feels like it was made 6+ years ago. I've met a lot of resistance in terms of getting Webpack and Babel introduced... I've never been a fan of ng's dependency injection system, it always felt like cjs's require (combined with browserify/webpack) is cleaner. I know these tools are fairly new... that said, working without them f…

>I know these tools are fairly new... that said, working without them feels like developing web applications back in the late 90's. Just painful

Large scale Javascript development is an absolute nightmare without TypeScript

Re: Why you can't be a good .NET developer

#13

Post by HillRat »

lujim wrote: post #3

50% smug developer snobbery and 50% truth. As much as I hate to admit it, it is easy to be mediocre in the legacy webforms world of .NET and a lot of places are stuck in that world. To some degree that speaks to the success of ASP.NET allowing decent programmers to double as mediocre web developers. I was one for a long time and am still one some days. I think the MVC, Entity Framework, Web Api world of .Net is as go…

The problem with the OP is that it can be summed up as "writer doesn't want to work on legacy systems." Good for him! But the amount of greenfield development is a minuscule slice of SLOC out there in the world.

Context matters. I've seen "derpy enterprise shops" build lambda architectures on Azure, startups cargo-culting their way through MEAN-stack apps, and, yes, LoB apps that were still Java-through-CGI (shudder). You can be a great developer in virtually any language, in virtually any environment. Or, I suppose, you can bitch about it on your blog.

Re: Why you can't be a good .NET developer

#15

Post by tracker1 »

aphextron wrote: post #12
tracker1 wrote: post #5

I'm currently working in a team on a MEAN-stack project... it's less than 6 months old, and feels like it was made 6+ years ago. I've met a lot of resistance in terms of getting Webpack and Babel introduced... I've never been a fan of ng's dependency injection system, it always felt like cjs's require (combined with browserify/webpack) is cleaner. I know these tools are fairly new... that said, working without them f…

>I know these tools are fairly new... that said, working without them feels like developing web applications back in the late 90's. Just painful Large scale Javascript development is an absolute nightmare without TypeScript

If you're using feature based project structure, it really isn't bad. Typescript doesn't offer that much over modern JS development with webpack.

Re: Why you can't be a good .NET developer

#16

Post by ak39 »

Derpy enterprise folks have had too many traumatic turns with Microsoft tooling. There is a reason for this apparent or perceived "stupidity". It isn't stupidity. It is caution.

The trauma really began with VB6, then ASP, then continued with Webforms, then Silverlight, then WPF ... if you thought that the current cohort of JS developers have framework fatigue, you should see surviving Microsoft "derpies" nursing technical debt such as LINQToSQL or strange extensions of Sharepoint.

The Java folks were less traumatized in this regard. But they had their moments with EJB (entity beans anybody)?

Re: Why you can't be a good .NET developer

#17

Post by axiom255 »

I can't work out whether this is a criticism of a corporate development culture (equally applicable to other tech stacks and legacy + reality of corporate world), or a "Microsoft is bad" argument, or possibly an ad hominem "only morons do MS, do you want to work with morons?" style argument...

Frankly I don't like the level of generalisation and apparent prejudice, and although I respect one's right to hold such an opinion, I think the conclusions of the article are wrong.

Re: Why you can't be a good .NET developer

#18

Post by ilaksh »

tracker1 wrote: post #5

I'm currently working in a team on a MEAN-stack project... it's less than 6 months old, and feels like it was made 6+ years ago. I've met a lot of resistance in terms of getting Webpack and Babel introduced... I've never been a fan of ng's dependency injection system, it always felt like cjs's require (combined with browserify/webpack) is cleaner. I know these tools are fairly new... that said, working without them f…

MEAN is actually pretty outdated. More like React and RethinkDB and a million other things.

But yeah, having had all three roles, back-end is often much easier than front-end or full-stack, despite the false sense of superiority that back-end only devs have.

Also having done C# for several years as well as JavaScript, Java/C# type languages are overall easier than JavaScript because you get things like intellisense, static type checking etc. from the compiler.

Re: Why you can't be a good .NET developer

#19

Post by nikdaheratik »

axiom255 wrote: post #17

I can't work out whether this is a criticism of a corporate development culture (equally applicable to other tech stacks and legacy + reality of corporate world), or a "Microsoft is bad" argument, or possibly an ad hominem "only morons do MS, do you want to work with morons?" style argument... Frankly I don't like the level of generalisation and apparent prejudice, and although I respect one's right to hold such an o…

I think the first one, corporate development culture, is pretty much the correct one. The difference between .Net and other environments is the ratio of corporate to everything else is so skewed that you have to either "think enterprise" or jump ship for something else.

All that being said, I'm sure if you have a well run IT department, you can get along just great with .Net even at smaller companies.

Re: Why you can't be a good .NET developer

#20

Post by tracker1 »

ilaksh wrote: post #18
tracker1 wrote: post #5

I'm currently working in a team on a MEAN-stack project... it's less than 6 months old, and feels like it was made 6+ years ago. I've met a lot of resistance in terms of getting Webpack and Babel introduced... I've never been a fan of ng's dependency injection system, it always felt like cjs's require (combined with browserify/webpack) is cleaner. I know these tools are fairly new... that said, working without them f…

MEAN is actually pretty outdated. More like React and RethinkDB and a million other things. But yeah, having had all three roles, back-end is often much easier than front-end or full-stack, despite the false sense of superiority that back-end only devs have. Also having done C# for several years as well as JavaScript, Java/C# type languages are overall easier than JavaScript because you get things like intellisense,…

I agree on C# being easier overall, but I find less disconnect with node.js on the server when JS is the client. It's usually the structure of Java/C# type projects that tends to get to me more than anything... just more complicated than it should be.
Post reply on HN