Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Code Project
  1. Home
  2. The Lounge
  3. No .NET programmers, please.

No .NET programmers, please.

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved The Lounge
csharpc++com
54 Posts 33 Posters 3 Views 1 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • realJSOPR realJSOP

    The guy is a tool.

    ".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
    -----
    You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
    -----
    "Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997

    D Offline
    D Offline
    djdanlib 0
    wrote on last edited by
    #42

    Someone must have misinterpreted the developers' requests for a better tool.

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • H HimanshuJoshi

      I stopped reading at the point he says "Now let me clarify — .NET is a dandy language".

      R Offline
      R Offline
      Rick Shaub
      wrote on last edited by
      #43

      I'm sure he meant MSIL, which is a great productvity booster...

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • L Lost User

        That's something I always wondered about. Why do bosses always expect everybody to be euphoric about whatever they want them to do? It usually ia hard work and they have to wave with some money to get somebody to do it day by day. If it were so much fun, they would have a ticket booth in front of their offices and make you pay for admission. In this article, this guy keeps talking about startups. Startups begin from scratch and have a lot of work to do if they are to succeed. Wasting time on writing the boilerplate code lessens their chances. If the boss does not understand this, I would not really be enthusiastic to work in his treadmill.

        "I just exchanged opinions with my boss. I went in with mine and came out with his." - me, 2011 ---
        I am endeavoring, Madam, to construct a mnemonic memory circuit using stone knives and bearskins - Mr. Spock 1935 and me 2011

        T Offline
        T Offline
        TRK3
        wrote on last edited by
        #44

        It might be that startup's choose open source software and tools because of economic constraints. If you have no money and no revenue stream and you are working for yourself out of your home office, then it seems to make economic sense to avoid paying for tools and licenses and do the extra work yourself. Once you've got a product built on that and a revenue stream and can actually afford to hire someone, you are already committed to a platform. Doesn't have anything to do with what's technically the right thing to do.

        L 2 Replies Last reply
        0
        • F Fabio Franco

          Wow, a lot of nonsense in there.... I put in my 2¢ in there: "However, if you need to make a 1.7 oz burger, you simply can’t" This sentence alone is enough to prove you have no idea what you're talking about when arguing about .net. Yes, .net related tools (Visual Studio specially) has lots of tools to automate stuff, but these tools are not the framework itself and they generate code automatically that you could write yourself. The so called "wizards" are a bad thing because many people grow dependent on them and don't really know how stuff work and end up limiting themselves and developing bad habits based on wrong premises. But they can be a good thing for productivity, but only if you already know what they are doing. I don't like them myself, because I don't like to loose control. Having said that, the .net framework is more powerful than most frameworks/languages/VMs. Specially if we are talking about windows desktop applications. You CAN DO more than most frameworks/languages. Not only it's not limited to on kind of application, it takes the power on them to the next level. .Net framework allows you to: 1 - Develop Desktop Apps 2 - Web Apps 3 - Embedded Circuits Apps 4 - Games (XNA Studio) 5 - User Mode Windows Drivers 6 - Cloud Apps All of this are pretty much native capabilities of the framework. And the list goes on... What other technology allows that (and very well)? .Net also allows you to work in relatively low levels for those who know how computers work (not like you said) and the people that don't understand it can put that as their own fault, it's their limitation, it's not the fault of the framework. I think before posting nonsense on the web, you should educate yourself about what you're talking about. I'd never want to work for a company that takes such assumptions as truth and miss the opportunities to work with great people. Let's see how your company lasts, I wouldn't invest on it. As I wouldn't in any company that dismisses any other technology in such ways.

          M Offline
          M Offline
          Member 3690834
          wrote on last edited by
          #45

          Have a look at the binary playhouse response: http://www.binplay.com/2011/03/why-ceos-should-not-be-hired-to-write_28.html[^] So .NET developers are not creating real code? Barnes and Nobles, Walmart, and Target all run on .NET. Are they not running real code? Were they all able to push a magic button to create those websites? Is there a "build massive e-commerce website" button in Visual Studio? Where is it?

          F 1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • M Member 3690834

            Have a look at the binary playhouse response: http://www.binplay.com/2011/03/why-ceos-should-not-be-hired-to-write_28.html[^] So .NET developers are not creating real code? Barnes and Nobles, Walmart, and Target all run on .NET. Are they not running real code? Were they all able to push a magic button to create those websites? Is there a "build massive e-commerce website" button in Visual Studio? Where is it?

            F Offline
            F Offline
            Fabio Franco
            wrote on last edited by
            #46

            :laugh: That was a good one ;P

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • N Nemanja Trifunovic

              This one will be popular here at CP: CEO Friday: Why we don’t hire .NET programmers [^] :-D

              utf8-cpp

              modified on Saturday, March 26, 2011 2:45 PM

              L Offline
              L Offline
              Lost User
              wrote on last edited by
              #47

              Well, that's 5 minutes I won't get back! Silly. -Max

              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • T TRK3

                It might be that startup's choose open source software and tools because of economic constraints. If you have no money and no revenue stream and you are working for yourself out of your home office, then it seems to make economic sense to avoid paying for tools and licenses and do the extra work yourself. Once you've got a product built on that and a revenue stream and can actually afford to hire someone, you are already committed to a platform. Doesn't have anything to do with what's technically the right thing to do.

                L Offline
                L Offline
                Lost User
                wrote on last edited by
                #48

                I'm building a start-up right now. I chose to invest some $$ in my development tools so I could be sure the results are consistent: and they are. Despite what some may think it's not always a bad thing to have to pay for your tools. When my product is ready (it's 80% finished now) it will be based on a good sustainable platform. (VS2008, ActiveReports 6). Yeah, had to invest. Glad I didn't go "open source". -Max :D

                T 1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • N Nish Nishant

                  Well he assumes people who use .NET only use .NET. He's gotta open his eyes wider I think. Or maybe he's just frustrated at not being able to hire good devs (not surprising given his generally narrow-minded attitude).

                  Regards, Nish


                  Most recent article : Adding data-bindable attributes to C# enums using the dynamic runtime My technology blog: voidnish.wordpress.com

                  M Offline
                  M Offline
                  MarkLoboo
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #49

                  :thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:

                  All are born right-handed. Only gifted few overcome it. There's NO excuse for not commenting your code.

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • L Lost User

                    I'm building a start-up right now. I chose to invest some $$ in my development tools so I could be sure the results are consistent: and they are. Despite what some may think it's not always a bad thing to have to pay for your tools. When my product is ready (it's 80% finished now) it will be based on a good sustainable platform. (VS2008, ActiveReports 6). Yeah, had to invest. Glad I didn't go "open source". -Max :D

                    T Offline
                    T Offline
                    TRK3
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #50

                    Sounds like you are a bit smarter than your average wantabee enterpreneur. Sometimes when you have no revenue stream you don't think you can afford to invest in development tools. (Especially if you aren't really confident that you are actually going to make money at it.) That's generally the wrong reason to make that choice. The right environment and tools up front are worth whatever you have to do to scrape up the money for them.

                    L 1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • T TRK3

                      Sounds like you are a bit smarter than your average wantabee enterpreneur. Sometimes when you have no revenue stream you don't think you can afford to invest in development tools. (Especially if you aren't really confident that you are actually going to make money at it.) That's generally the wrong reason to make that choice. The right environment and tools up front are worth whatever you have to do to scrape up the money for them.

                      L Offline
                      L Offline
                      Lost User
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #51

                      We seem to think alike in this. Personally, I don't consider $2,500-$4,000 (or thereabouts) to be too huge an investment to develop something that's going to be really quality. In the software field you can get away with a price tag that low and set up a pretty good set of operational tools. Try that with a body shop! So far I've invested about 14 months in the development of the product itself after spending the initial cost on equipment and software tools. Once I take it to market I think I'll be able to compete pretty well on a cost basis because, well, there isn't much in the way of cost. The biggest investment is really my time and labor. I've also got a couple of partners that are willing to invest also, in advertising and expert installation and deployment so between all that and the 12 years of industry experience I have with this I think we at-least have a shot. If it doesn't fly I haven't really lost anything. And I find the .Net platform to be excellent to the task. If nothing else, I've become proficient with something I was not proficient with 14 months ago! -Max :D

                      K 1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • T TRK3

                        It might be that startup's choose open source software and tools because of economic constraints. If you have no money and no revenue stream and you are working for yourself out of your home office, then it seems to make economic sense to avoid paying for tools and licenses and do the extra work yourself. Once you've got a product built on that and a revenue stream and can actually afford to hire someone, you are already committed to a platform. Doesn't have anything to do with what's technically the right thing to do.

                        L Offline
                        L Offline
                        Lost User
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #52

                        You can already get quite far with a VS Express. And a single license for a standard Visual Studio also should still be affordable. And you can always write your own little tools. I have made myself a little program that generates the skeleton of an entity or data object from a database table. Nothing fancy, but it saves me lots of absolutely uninteresting typing and time. Elevating the tedious parts to a matter of principle does not sound like a produktive way to work.

                        "I just exchanged opinions with my boss. I went in with mine and came out with his." - me, 2011 ---
                        I am endeavoring, Madam, to construct a mnemonic memory circuit using stone knives and bearskins - Mr. Spock 1935 and me 2011

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • D David1987

                          WTF Just WFT Using all those fancy schmancy newfangled things in .NET is not required - you can still do low level coding in almost any .NET language (but hey I don't know all of them), and it's in fact harder because things like the GC get in your way and you have to work around that.

                          D Offline
                          D Offline
                          David1987
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #53

                          Honestly, what noob would downvote this? Someone who can't do low level programming?

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • L Lost User

                            We seem to think alike in this. Personally, I don't consider $2,500-$4,000 (or thereabouts) to be too huge an investment to develop something that's going to be really quality. In the software field you can get away with a price tag that low and set up a pretty good set of operational tools. Try that with a body shop! So far I've invested about 14 months in the development of the product itself after spending the initial cost on equipment and software tools. Once I take it to market I think I'll be able to compete pretty well on a cost basis because, well, there isn't much in the way of cost. The biggest investment is really my time and labor. I've also got a couple of partners that are willing to invest also, in advertising and expert installation and deployment so between all that and the 12 years of industry experience I have with this I think we at-least have a shot. If it doesn't fly I haven't really lost anything. And I find the .Net platform to be excellent to the task. If nothing else, I've become proficient with something I was not proficient with 14 months ago! -Max :D

                            K Offline
                            K Offline
                            koke17
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #54

                            I agree with you. If I want to start a new company and want to sell my products to the corporations that will really pay for high quality products, I can't bring them open source tools, free databases, unknown tools,... I work in Spain in US corportation, locations worldwide. If you want to sell us a product, or work with us as external contractor (developer), these are the requisites: VB.NET / C#, SQL Server, Business Objects/Crystal Reports... If you can't afford this... :((

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            Reply
                            • Reply as topic
                            Log in to reply
                            • Oldest to Newest
                            • Newest to Oldest
                            • Most Votes


                            • Login

                            • Don't have an account? Register

                            • Login or register to search.
                            • First post
                              Last post
                            0
                            • Categories
                            • Recent
                            • Tags
                            • Popular
                            • World
                            • Users
                            • Groups