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

.NET 10

devblogs.microsoft.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 605 posts

Re: .NET 10

#321

Post by hvb2 »

pier25 wrote: post #319
jitbit wrote: post #2

For us, every .NET upgrade since .NET 5 has gone surprisingly smoothly and reduced CPU/RAM usage by 10–15%. We were even able to downgrade our cloud servers to smaller instances, literally. I wish .NET was more popular among startups, if only C# could get rid of the "enterpisey" stigma.

> I wish .NET was more popular among startups, if only C# could get rid of the "enterpisey" stigma There are plenty of real issues that are not the enterprise stigma. I built a backend web api this year with it and C# is fantastic. EF Core is truly one of the best ORMs I've ever used. That said, I regret that decision and won't be using it again for any new projects. Honestly it looks like Microsoft is distracted and…

> That said, I regret that decision and won't be using it again for any new projects.

Genuinely curious, why?

Re: .NET 10

#322

Post by thewebguyd »

mexicocitinluez wrote: post #267
GiorgioG wrote: post #243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Congratulations, you worked at a huge company. Nothing to do with the tech stack.

Yea, this is "enterprise" development 101. The fact that large companies pick an established tech over newer ones isn't about .NET/C# per se, it's about large companies and the way they work.

And from the company's perspective, that's the right way to operate. Sure, it sucks for the individual hacker-type, but a big enterprise doesn't want "move fast, break things" they want the opposite. Rigidity, proven processes, stability and backwards compatibility.

Working there you aren't building the next Google, you're probably maintaining a some 20 year old order-to-cash ERP process that's boring, but critically important to the business, and is exactly the software you don't want to move fast and break.

Just don't go work for big enterprises if you don't want that environment. It won't matter what language/tech stack, it's just big non-tech company things.

But there's plenty of us out there that don't mind those jobs. Pay can be good enough, and usually offer great work-life balance. I work IT ops for one. I'm remote, I put in my 9 to 5 and I'm done. I'm (thankfully) not on call, I get unlimited PTO, and my personal time is 100% my own to go do non tech things with.

Re: .NET 10

#323

Post by shortrounddev2 »

pier25 wrote: post #319
jitbit wrote: post #2

For us, every .NET upgrade since .NET 5 has gone surprisingly smoothly and reduced CPU/RAM usage by 10–15%. We were even able to downgrade our cloud servers to smaller instances, literally. I wish .NET was more popular among startups, if only C# could get rid of the "enterpisey" stigma.

> I wish .NET was more popular among startups, if only C# could get rid of the "enterpisey" stigma There are plenty of real issues that are not the enterprise stigma. I built a backend web api this year with it and C# is fantastic. EF Core is truly one of the best ORMs I've ever used. That said, I regret that decision and won't be using it again for any new projects. Honestly it looks like Microsoft is distracted and…

Just stick with the classic frameworks. Razor works great as does MVC WebAPI

Re: .NET 10

#324

Post by pier25 »

phillipcarter wrote: post #10
leetharris wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I wish .NET was more popular among startups, if only C# could get rid of the "enterpisey" stigma. Too hard to ignore the benefits of cross-stack gains in Typescript/Python. The C# native phone, Blazor, etc just isn't quite there yet. Tried it at the last company, and full stack TS was just so much easier to do. The reality is that the vast majority of startups don't make it. The #1 thing startups should be focusing…

Is it though? Backends can be any language and there's a lot more variety there -- TS+node, Go, Python, Java. It's just .NET that's largely ignored for no real technical basis.

> Backends can be any language

In +90% of cases you will still need a frontend for that backend.

TS full stack is by far the best option for this.

Re: .NET 10

#325

Post by tracker1 »

nicoburns wrote: post #210
jitbit wrote: post #2

For us, every .NET upgrade since .NET 5 has gone surprisingly smoothly and reduced CPU/RAM usage by 10–15%. We were even able to downgrade our cloud servers to smaller instances, literally. I wish .NET was more popular among startups, if only C# could get rid of the "enterpisey" stigma.

> I wish .NET was more popular among startups, if only C# could get rid of the "enterpisey" stigma. I tried .NET and liked C# as a language. But even though the language and runtime are now open source, it seemed like a lot of the recommended libraries were still commercially licensed, which was an immediate nope from me. I've never encountered that in any other ecosystem.

What libraries are you referring to? I really haven't used any commercial libraries at all since the .Net Core transition (and .Net 5+ as a result).

Are you looking at older materials?

Re: .NET 10

#326

Post by pier25 »

kurokawad wrote: post #34

To me, it's pretty much unbelievable that Microsoft introduces an agent framework while for JSON serializing third-party Newtonsoft is still the go-to. Edit. I was not aware that the gap between System.Text.Json and Newtonsoft narrowed, take my comment with a grain of salt, please!

There's so much stuff they could be working on instead like a first party Postgres driver, better OpenAPI, improving Minimal APIs, etc.

Re: .NET 10

#327

Post by tracker1 »

jasomill wrote: post #271
majora2007 wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are a few non-paid PDF libraries, but that is the biggest pain point in .NET, anytime you need advanced features for PDF, you're better off paying for a license (it's just insanely expensive unless you're a large company). Having worked on some basic parsing of metadata from PDF spec, I would rather pay than have to code something myself. PDF is such a PIA.

I've used libqpdf extensively from C++/CLI with excellent results, but since C++/CLI is deprecated-ish and Windows-only, I wouldn't disagree with PDF being a pain point, and if I get the time, a cross-platform open source .NET wrapper for libqpdf is at the top of my list of potential projects. libqpdf also intentionally limits its scope to PDF structure, so doesn't address nontrivial content creation or manipulation…

AFAIK pinvoke (DllImport) works today just like it always has if you want to create FFI calls to C libraries. It's not windows only for sure.

Re: .NET 10

#328

Post by tracker1 »

runjake wrote: post #241
GiorgioG wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Recommended by whom? I've been doing .NET for 23 years (since the first beta) and I've never paid for a single library in any commercial project I've been part of.

Not OP but I still run into paid libraries (eg Telerik) all over the place in projects.

I never liked their stuff myself, and generally avoided them.

Re: .NET 10

#329

Post by banashark »

madarcho wrote: post #50
cies wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really like F# (as I like OCaml, Elm and Haskell); but I'm always afraid MS will kill it one day. It helps that now most (if not all) parts of the stack are open source and run on Linux.

Where is this worry coming from? (I'm curious, not shutting it down) I might be biased from having worked with production F#, but it feels more like functional is making its way into C#, as the general industry sees value in functional principles. So F# feels like its more here to stay?

They killed off VB, which if I recall the announcement correctly, noted that it statistically had a larger user base (by Microsoft metrics) than F#. There are a number of companies relying on F# for critical operations and MS has some use of F# internally which I understand has no plans of replacement, which helps balance out the fear.
Post reply on HN