Why you can't be a good .NET developer
codeofrob.com
Why you can't be a good .NET developer
1–10 of 22 posts
Re: Why you can't be a good .NET developer
#2Yeah the community focuses more on the 9-5 line of business apps. It moves slower but for different reasons. Honestly I haven't looked back. I like being able to push the new boundaries
Re: Why you can't be a good .NET developer
#350% 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 good or better than anything else out there and a 'good' developer in that world is just as accomplished as a 'good' developer in the Django or Rails world.
I would also argue that it has proven much more challenging to maintain and extend legacy .Net applications than it was to work on a clean, solid, and in many ways more complicated Django/Postres/Ubuntu stack. Keeping a beat up winforms,webforms,soap driven SOA legacy stack straight takes a decent amount of patience.
Re: Why you can't be a good .NET developer
#4I would suggest that good .NET developers (like any other language, etc.) are the ones that aren't constantly looking for a 'new technology' to move into, and instead get on with writing quality software / solving the problem at hand.
Re: Why you can't be a good .NET developer
#5I'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 feels like developing web applications back in the late 90's. Just painful.
I've interviewed for a few positions where Java is used on the backend, and because of my strong front end and JS experience the assumption is that I won't be able to keep up on the backend. It's pretty ridiculous, when the opposite assumptions never seem to present themselves. I've worked with multiple database systems, and multiple server-side architectures. Just avoided Java because every time I've used it, it just felt excessively painful to use.
I've said for the past few years (ever since Prototype, then jQuery) that one should be looking for solid developers with the ability to learn, try and adapt over someone with a checkbox skill. Yes, you'll be hard pressed to find a developer with "solid React experience." The point is that hiring a solid developer is hard, but that should be the primary goal.
Re: Why you can't be a good .NET developer
#6I would suggest that good .NET developers (like any other language, etc.) are the ones that aren't constantly looking for a 'new technology' to move into, and instead get on with writing quality software / solving the problem at hand.
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't that it doesn't work, or that it never serves a purpose, but that most of the time it is applied it isn't good.
I spent the better part of the 2000's writing code in C#, it's still a favorite language. I've spend most of the past 5-6 years writing far more JS, and a lot of Node migration. Some of that isn't so great either. In the end, writing code that's easy to setup, configure, follow and understand is more important than any language specifics, and I feel that Java and C# developers forget that in favor of "Enterprise" practices.
Re: Why you can't be a good .NET developer
#7Yeah the community focuses more on the 9-5 line of business apps. It moves slower but for different reasons. Honestly I haven't looked back. I like being able to push the new boundaries
Where do you move? what kind of industry?
Re: Why you can't be a good .NET developer
#8I would suggest that good .NET developers (like any other language, etc.) are the ones that aren't constantly looking for a 'new technology' to move into, and instead get on with writing quality software / solving the problem at hand.
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.
Re: Why you can't be a good .NET developer
#9Yeah the community focuses more on the 9-5 line of business apps. It moves slower but for different reasons. Honestly I haven't looked back. I like being able to push the new boundaries
Where do you move? what kind of industry?
Industry does not matter because it is the "company" that picks the tools so you will want to find a company that is capable of change.
Re: Why you can't be a good .NET developer
#1050% 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…
I'd add WCF to that list as well, especially when the client and server are both in .Net languages... I never really liked the XML binding, and preferred to use programmatic binding, and generally with JSON endpoints... but the ability to distribute a simple class library of interfaces, that could then build a WCF client instance and connect to a given endpoint is really nice. The painful thing to me was always consuming ill-defined services written in other languages.
I always hated webforms, to be honest, before MVC, I'd usually write as simple aspx as possible, and use ashx for most of the edges... The first couple releases of ASP.Net got better, but still the disconnected events were somewhat more painful than straight html+js when it came to anything complex, more so as ajax took hold. MVC made those edges easier to write. For the past 5 years or so, been writing far more node.js, and though less polished than .Net on the server, has been far more pleasant.