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

Why Startups Could Use .NET, But Don’t

piehead.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 193 posts

Re: Why Startups Could Use .NET, But Don’t

#51

Post by eitland »

jswinghammer wrote: post #44
mpakes wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's a fantastic framework that should and could supplant the JVM. What makes you feel that .NET is so superior to the JVM? The JVM itself seems like a solid, performant VM platform, and there is a broad selection of languages in Scala, Groovy, Clojure, JRuby, Jython and friends. Disclaimer: I'm platform agnostic and don't currently develop on the JVM or the .NET CLR, so I have no horse in this race. I'm genuinely…

Here are my reasons for not using Java: Visual Studio .Net (huge), C# vs Java (C# has WAY more features), SQL Server integration (if you are using it), IIS is pretty much painless to configure and works really well with .Net, LINQ which is a pretty good ORM.

People who use Visual Studio often also buy ReSharper, just to get the same refatoring tools you get for free using eclipse or NetBeans. Just saying.

Re: Why Startups Could Use .NET, But Don’t

#52

Post by JonoW »

StavrosK wrote: post #49
kenjackson wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How easy is it to, say, use Eclipse with C#, You do realize that C# in VS is just a compiler? It's csc.exe. There's no reason you can't host it in Eclipse. In fact there are several 3rd party components that allow you to host a C# editor anywhere you like. The problem, in this case at least, is that the C# experience is so solid that the motivation to create an Eclipse one is pretty low. Maybe the Mono folks have som…

I do realise this, I just added eclipse as an afterthought, as it's arguably as irrelevant as jQuery. The main focus was on the webserver/database, I just didn't expect someone to single the IDE out.

Database isn't relevant, there are .Net drivers for pretty much every popular database. Loads of .Net devs use MySql and Postgres, and using document databases like MongoDB is also an option now

Re: Why Startups Could Use .NET, But Don’t

#53

Post by vyrotek »

thomasz wrote: post #33
vyrotek wrote: post #10

Our startup is based on .Net and hosted on Azure. I don't think I realized just how uncommon this was until we were invited to Microsoft in Redmond and saw the excitement from the developers when they learned that we were a startup. We love the framework. But its definitely not the only stack we use. I also agree that there are bad .Net developers that spoil it for the rest of us. In my opinion, most of the issues se…

How is Azure working for you? The last time I've looked into it, the documentation was rather sub standard compared to the MSDN base line.

Its working well for us. Its been interesting growing our company along side Azure. My company http://IActionable.com launched around the same time that Azure went RTM. So we've been through almost every bump and challenge together. I definitely have my list of things I wish they would change though. I consider myself one of the more squeaky members on the Azure Forums. Most of my issues are with deployment speed and Azure Table Storage features.

Our company is part of an early adopter program which is the reason they invited us to Redmond. We got to meet the Azure teams and really drill them with questions. I came back with a better appreciation for what they're trying to pull off. It feels like they're trying to build an race car and drive it at the same time. Microsoft wants to be attractive to the corporate world and smaller businesses at the same time. That's though.

The documentation isn't fantastic but I blame it on the speed that they are moving. Luckily there are some pretty smart and available developers that contribute to the community. Guys like Steve Marx (http://blog.smarx.com) and Wade Wegner (http://www.wadewegner.com) really know their stuff. I met them on my last visit. We've actually been invited up for another round of Azure 'sneak peeks' in June.

Re: Why Startups Could Use .NET, But Don’t

#55

Post by wslh »

bcrescimanno wrote: post #6

There is a strong perception (whether accurate or not--and I honestly don't know the answer) that it's the same old story with Microsoft: if you go the .NET route, you've gotta buy into the entire Microsoft ecosystem. It's not just .NET that you're choosing; you're also choosing Windows servers, IIS, Visual Studio, etc. If that perception is accurate, it's entirely reasonable to say, "Despite liking a lot of what .NE…

Currently the same applies to every known service. You have developed using AWS or App Engine and try to migrate to other systems without changing a line of code?

Re: Why Startups Could Use .NET, But Don’t

#56

Post by gte910h »

guard-of-terra wrote: post #20
sofuture wrote: post #2

The real answer is just as much about our industry’s culture as it is about technology. No, it's entirely about our industry's culture. Which is a shame. It's a fantastic framework that should and could supplant the JVM. It never will though, thanks to Microsoft's boneheaded choices and the blog posts like 'Why I don't hire .Net developers'.

The problem is Microsoft. .Net would be a perfect thing if it wasn't fully owned my MS, in which case it probably won't be far as perfect. However, you have to use MS OS, MS development tools, MS deployment - and it's pretty painful especially because you can't use shiny macbooks any longer :) If you try to replace any element of that chain, you're on your own entirely. On other hand, MS ecosystem is smaller than non…

> you can't use shiny macbooks any longer :

Windows 7 supposedly installs and runs on MBPs just fine with bootcamp.

You can even use a USB stick to install.

Re: Why Startups Could Use .NET, But Don’t

#57

Post by ibejoeb »

sofuture wrote: post #2

The real answer is just as much about our industry’s culture as it is about technology. No, it's entirely about our industry's culture. Which is a shame. It's a fantastic framework that should and could supplant the JVM. It never will though, thanks to Microsoft's boneheaded choices and the blog posts like 'Why I don't hire .Net developers'.

It's not about engaging and surpassing the capabilities of the JVM. The CLR has some very cool features. It's not quite as portable, but it's pretty neat.

It's currently lacking the community and corpus that Java, Ruby, Python, and almost everything else have. It surely has an active community, but it's just not as substantial. There's a Java library to do almost any esoteric equation, handle any ambiguous file formats, integrate with some bastardized SSO scheme...

I've worked at a lot a Microsoft shops. I'd bring in .Net any day to one of them. It's fantastic if you're already in the club. I've never started anything new, though. The article states that different platforms have equal tooling (I don't agree; VS is pretty slick and hard to beat, if you're into that kinda thing), so then cost certainly plays, and Microsoft's not making it compelling on the front.

Re: Why Startups Could Use .NET, But Don’t

#58

Post by pnathan »

I don't know about startups. I work for a mid-sized company.

I consider open source to be a better choice in my discussions for these reasons:

* Vendor lock-in avoidance. This can induce some pretty harsh long-term effects, especially with maintenance fees, inflexible users, and data isolation.

* Code escrow. If your customers are relying on a particular component being available for you, it's not a really good thing if that component is 'disappeared' by an API rev. Open source provides trivial code escrow facilities.

* Speed of development. Open source projects seem to move faster than enterprise-level software.

* Company risk: there's no risk of the source code simply going away because the company folded or was bought out. If needed, we can maintain an open-source component if it's that critical.

* Standards-compliance: most open source seems to think about standards more.

* 'Wave of The Future': many novel developments are in open source. If we make sure to ride that wave, we won't obsolete ourselves by locking to a single company.

These reasons all relate to software maintenance and agility in some fashion. Being able to maintain software and to shift platforms (when appropriate) is important. Open source allows those qualities to be there more than non-open source, in my opinion.

I have seen enough Java/MS revs pass through that I don't think it would be professional to recommend solutions based on those platforms, in general.

Best wishes to those those do venture out onto the churny waters, though.

Re: Why Startups Could Use .NET, But Don’t

#59

Post by gte910h »

d0m wrote: post #28

With rails or php, developers can use the editor and the OS they want. With .net, you're "forced" to use Visual Studio and Windows. Also, I feel like .net teams are a bit closed to the rest of the programming community. Lots of C#/C++ programmers think that everything that is not C#/C++ is a joke or a little scripting language. "Omg, I would never build my 2D game on Python and save 100 hours" - says the C++ develope…

>while the C++/C# mentality is: "Imagine that an idiot will use your library so play it as safe and defensive as possible".

That may be the C# mentality, but the C++ mentality is generally speaking "We'll have some guys on the team build the tools of gods, then everyone else will use their classes following their coding standard".

Or the mentality is "wtf are all these bugs"

C++ is only possible really in environments with strict standards and the ability to fire those who don't or can't follow them.

Re: Why Startups Could Use .NET, But Don’t

#60

Post by joeyespo »

> [...] don’t look for PHP programmers or .NET programmers, look for programmers with experience on a variety of platforms.

This isn't mutually exclusive.

.NET is just a tool. Perhaps it should instead be rephrased and generalized: don't look for programmers who only have experience with X. But that's still a different argument.

Post reply on HN